IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


m 

m  m 

IIS 

lU 

u 


|25 
LS.    12.0 


I    >•> 

1^        IE 


6" 


FhotograiJiic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WIST  MAIN  STRIET 

WfBSTIR,NX  I43SS 

(716)172-4903 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  MicroreproductionsV  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notaa/Notes  tachniquaa  at  bibliographiquaa 


Th«  C( 
to  the 


Tha  Instituta  haa  attamptad  to  obtain  tha  boat 
original  copy  availabia  for  filming.  Paaturaa  of  thia 
copy  which  may  ba  bibliographicaliy  uniqua. 
which  may  altar  any  of  tha  imagaa  in  tha 
raproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  changa 
tha  usual  mathod  of  filming,  ara  chackad  balow. 


□    Colourod  covara/ 
Couvortura  do  coulour 


D 


Covara  damaged/ 
Couvartura  andommagia 


Covars  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


I I    Couverture  reataurie  at/ou  pailicuiAa 


D 


Cover  title  missing/ 

Ls  titre  de  couverture  manque 


[""k^Colourad  mapa/ 

lv^    Cartea  gAographiquea  un  couleur 

□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noirel 

□   Coloured  platea  and/or  illuatrations/ 
Planchea  at/ou  illuatrationa  en  couleur 

□    Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli4  avec  d'autrea  documents 


D 


D 


D 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadowa  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serrie  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
dittoi'sion  l«  long  do  la  marge  Intirieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
11  se  peut  que  certainea  pagea  blanchea  ajouties 
lore  d'une  reatauration  apparaiaaent  dana  la  texte. 
maia,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pagea  n'ont 
pea  iti  filmiea. 

Additional  commanta:/ 
Commentairea  supplAmantaires: 


L'Institut  a  microfilme  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'ii  lui  a  ite  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-4tre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite.  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mithoda  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dessous. 


□   Coloured  pages/ 
Pagea  de  couleur 

□   Pagea  damaged/ 
Pagea  endommagiea 

□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pagea  rastaurtes  at/ou  pelliculAes 

p~~U^ages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
UU    Pages  dicolorees,  tachatAea  ou  piquies 


The  in 
poasit 
of  the 
filmin 


Origir 
begini 
the  lai 
sion,  I 
other 
first  p 
sion,  { 
or  illu 


□Pagea  detached/ 
Pages  ditachies 

r~V^howthrough/ 
uLJ   Transparence 

r~1    Quality  of  print  varies/ 


D 


Quality  inigale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  metiriel  supplimentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


Theli 
shall  • 
TINUI 
whici 

IVIaps 

differ 

entire 

begin 

right 

requii 

methi 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc..  have  been  refilmed  to 
enaure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Lea  pages  totalement  ou  partieilement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure. 
etc..  ont  iti  filmies  i  nouveau  de  facon  it 
obtenir  la  mailleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  filmi  au  taux  da  rMuction  indiqui  ci-daaaoua. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


»X 


y 


12X 


^■ 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


Tha  copy  filrnod  h«r«  has  b««n  raproducad  thanks 
to  tha  ganarosity  of: 

Mtotropolitin  Toronto  Library 
Canadian  Hiitory  Papartmant 

Tha  imagas  appaaring  hara  ara  tha  bast  quality 
posslbia  consldaring  tha  condition  and  laglbllity 
of  tha  original  copy  and  In  kaaping  with  tha 
filming  contract  spaclficatlons. 


L'axamplaira  filnnA  f ut  raproduit  grica  k  la 
gAnArosM  da: 

RAatropolitan  Toronto  Library 
Canadian  Hirtory  Dapartmant 

Las  intagas  suKrantna  ont  4t4  raproduitaa  avac  la 
plus  grand  soin,  compta  tanu  da  la  condition  at 
da  la  nattatA  da  l'axamplaira  film*,  at  an 
conformit*  avac  las  conditions  du  contrat  da 
filmaga. 


Original  copias  In  printad  papar  covars  ara  fllmad 
baginning  with  tha  front  covar  and  anding  on 
tha  last  paga  with  a  printad  or  iiiuatratad  impraa- 
sion,  or  tha  back  covar  whan  appropriata.  All 
othar  original  copias  ara  fllmad  baginning  on  tha 
first  paga  with  a  printad  or  lilustratad  impras- 
slon,  and  anding  on  tha  last  paga  with  a  printad 
or  lilustratad  Imprasslon. 


Las  axamplairas  origlnaux  dont  la  couvartura  an 
paplar  ast  Imprlmto  sont  filmis  an  commanpant 
par  la  pramiar  plat  at  an  tarmlnant  solt  par  la 
darnlAra  paga  qui  comporta  una  amprainta 
d'Imprasslon  ou  d'illustration,  solt  par  la  sacond 
plat,  aalon  la  cas.  Toua  las  autras  axamplairas 
origlnaux  sont  filmte  an  commanpant  par  la 
pramlAra  paga  qui  comporta  una  amprainta 
d'Imprasslon  ou  d'illuatration  at  an  tarmlnant  par 
la  darnlAra  paga  qui  comporta  una  taila 
amprainta. 


Tha  last  racordad  frama  on  aach  microficha 
shall  contain  tha  symbol  — »•  (moaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  tha  symbol  ▼  (moaning  "END"), 
whichavar  applias. 


Un  das  symbolas  suhrants  apparattra  sur  la 
darnlAra  Imaga  da  chaqua  microficha,  salon  la 
cas:  la  symbols  — ►  signlfia  "A  SUIVRE",  la 
symbols  ▼  signlfia  "FIN". 


Maps,  platas,  charts,  ate,  may  ba  fllmad  at 
diffarant  raduction  ratios.  Thosa  too  larga  to  ba 
antiraiy  Includad  in  ona  axposura  ara  fllmad 
baginning  in  tha  uppar  laft  hand  corner,  loft  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  framas  as 
raqulrad.  Tha  following  diagrams  illustrata  tha 
mathod: 


Las  cartas,  pianchas.  tablaaux.  ate,  pauvant  ttra 
filmAs  A  das  taux  da  reduction  diff Arants. 
Lorsqua  la  documant  ast  trop  grand  pour  Atra 
raproduit  on  un  soul  clichA,  II  ast  film*  A  partir 
da  I'angla  supAriaur  gaucha,  da  gaucha  h  drolta, 
at  da  haut  an  bas,  an  pranant  la  nombra 
d'imngas  nAcassaira.  Las  diagrammas  suivants 
llluatrant  la  mAthoda. 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

T 

•                                                  < 

25ili  C 

2d. 

[ 

1               V 

I 

) 

COMI 

r 

1- 

B'                                             ' 

1 

* 

1 

1 

:                                         ■ 

i 

j 

i 

Ore 
inquir 
bounc 

Sen 

L 

Coi 

The. 

Ft 

1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ' 

sar 

Stll 

f 

Th 

s 

of  the 

1 

ject  b^ 

and  t 

'•.;  '■  ^-  ,. 

merit 
whicl 

■*  4 

intere 
triflin 
have 

.• 

of  wh 

_^»                                                                                                           "  ' ' 

onr  0 

Blair  < 

■ '  -.1'  '■                                       '   •' 

t,    _                    .^.  -.     ■    - 

"""  '*■  ■-"— —  ■•                      ■  - 

25ili  Co.voa:;ss, 
2d  iS^essloH. 


s. 


[  SRXATE.  ] 


\/ 


1 


h^tiyO 


UEPullT  AND  RESOLUTIONS 

FROM   A 


;i   ■{ 


MAY  30    L.J 

COMMITTEE  OF  THE  LEGISLATURE  OP  MASSACHUSETTS, 


III  relation  to  the  northeastern  boundary. 


^ 


May  10,  1838. 

Laid  on  ihe  'able,  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 


TV"- 


Report  and  resolves  in  relation  to  the  northeastern  boundary. 

Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts, 

In  >Senate,  February  7, 1838. 
Ordered,  That  the  Joint  Committee  on  Public  Lands  be  instructed  to 
inquire  what  m  asures  may  be  necessary  in  relation  to  the  northeastern 
boundary. 
Sent  down  for  concurrence. 

CHAS.  CALHOUN,  Clerk. 

House  of  Representatives, 

February  S,  1838.   ' . 
Concurred. 

L.  S.  CUSHING,  Clerk.    , 


Commonwealth  op  Massachusetts, 

In  Senate,  March  20,  1838. 

IVie  Joint  Committee  on  Public  Lands,  to  whom  was  committed  an  order  of 
February  7,  instructing"  them  "  to  inquire  what  measures  may  be  neces- 
sary in  relation  to  the  northeastern  boundary,"  have  considered  the 
subject,  and  ask  leave  to  submit  thejollowing  report :  .  i. 


uv 


The  pecuniary  interests  of  this  Commonwealth,  involved  in  the  question 
of  the  northeastern  boundary,  calls  loudly  for  the  consideration  of  the  sub- 
ject by  the  Legislature.  This  interest  is  greater  than  is  generally  supposed; 
and  the  subject  has  not^of  late,  received  that  attention  which  its  importance 
merits.  The  claim  upon  the  General  Government  for  militia  services, 
which  has  engaged  so  much  attention,  and  been  regarded  with  so  much 
interest,  both  by  the  people  and  the  Legislature  of  this  Commonwealth,  is 
trifling  compared  with  our  interest  in  the  disputed  territory.  There  we 
have  an  interest  of  some  six  or  eight  hundred  thousand  dollars,  one-third 
of  which  belongs  to  the  State  of  Maine ;  but  here  we  have  an  interest  in 
our  own  right  of  two  millions. 
Blair  di  Rives,  printers.  '♦  ' 


I 


{■ 


■v. 


[  431  ]  « 

The  disputed  Itirilory  coirprelui;ds  ncnily  f-evdj  nUIioiis  of  ncrep,  ilie 
joint  property  of  Massachusetts  and  Maiiie.  li  contains  10,71)5  square  ujiles, 
beinp:  2,9(15  square  miles,  or  1,859,200  acres,  more  than  the  entire  territory 
of  this  Commonwealth.  A  comn)ittec  of  our  own  Legislature,  who  visited 
these  hinds  in  1836,  say  of  the  Allagash  country,  which  lies  within  the 
disputed  territory,  "there  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  this  is  the  best  timbered 
tract  in  Maine,  if  not  in  the  world."  Again,  they  say,  "  this  timber  is  indis- 
pensable in  the  finish  and  ornamental  work  of  all  our  dwellings ;  and  to 
this  territory  must  nearly  all  the  Atlantic  towns  and  cities  look  for  a  supply. 
The  rapid  growth  of  these  places,  the  improved  taste  in  the  construction 
of  edifices  of  every  description,  the  increasing  ability  to  indulge  this  taste, 
the  immense  extent  of  country  dependant  for  a  supply  almost  exclusively 
on  this  redon,  afford  the  most  conclusive  evidence  that  the  value  must  be 
immense." 

Of  these  lands  more  than  three  millions  of  acres  belong  to  this  Common- 
wealth, and  are  worth,  at  the  present  time,  at  least  fifty  cents  per  acre, 
making  an  interest  of  more  than  one  million  and  a  half  of  dollars;  but  as 
these  lands  will  increase  in  value  as  the  settlement  extends,  it  is  highly- 
probable  that  the  Commonwealth,  if  left  to  the  quiet  enjoyment  of  her 
rightful  possessions,  will  realize  a  much  larger  sum.  While  the  people  of 
this  State  have  an  interest  of  this  magnitude  in  the  question  of  the  north- 
eastern boundary,  the  committee  believe  that,  as  the  guardians  of  the  public 
weal,  the  Legislature  ought  to  adopt  all  reasonable  measures  to  assert  the 
rights,  secure  the  interest,  and  vindicate  the  honor  of  the  Commonwealth. 

The  State  of  Maine  is  now  alive  to  this  subject.  Her  Legislature,  in 
1637,  adopted  spirited  resolutions  relative  to  this  question  of  boundary,  and 
Jier  Executive,  at  the  opening  of  the  session  of  the  present  Legislature,  has 
qgain  called  their  attention  to  the  subject.  "  It  is  certainly  a  remarkable 
fact,"  says  Governor  Kent,  "that  fifty-five  years  after  the  recognition  of 
American  independence  by  Great  Britain,  and  the  formal  and  precise 
demarkaiion  of  our  lihiits  in  the  treaty  of  peace,  the  extent  of  those  limits, 
and  the  territory  rightfully  subject  to  our  jurisdiction,  should  be  a  matter 
of  dispute  and  difference.  I  feel  it  to  be  my  duty,  in  this  my  first  official 
act,  to  call  your  attention  to  that  vitally  important  question,  the  true  limits 
of  our  State,  and  to  express  to  you  and  to  the  people  my  views  of  the 
claim  set  up  by  a  foreign  State  to  the  rightful  possession  of  a  large  part  of 
our  territory. 

"  The  first  duty  of  Maine,  as  it  seems  to  me,  is,  to  claim  the  immediate 
action  of  the  General  Government  to  move  efficiently  and  decidedly,  to 
bring  the  controversy  to  a  conclusion.  We  have  had  years  of  negotiation, 
and  we  are  told  that  we  are  apparently  no  nearer  to  a  termination  than  at 
the  commencement.  Maine  has  waited  with  the  most  exemplary  patience, 
till  even  her  large  stock  is  almost  exhausted.  She  has  no  disposition  to 
embarfass  the  action  of  the  General  Government ;  but  she  asks  that  some 
action  be  had,  some  movement  made  \yith  a  determinate  purpose  to  end 
the  controversy.  She  cannot  quietly  submit  to  have  her  territory  wrested 
frbni  her,  her  citizens  imprisoned,  her  territorial  jurisdiction  annihilated, 
arid'her  rights  lost  by 'the  bold  and  persevering  and  unopposed  claims  of  a 
foreign  power.  She  cannot  consent  to  be  left  alone  iri  the  controversy,  or 
to  be  left  in  doubt  as  to  the  aid  or  countenance  she  may  receive  from  the 
.authorities  of  the  Union,  in  maintaining  her  acknowledged  rights. 

"She  as^s  the  quiet  and  undisturbed  possession  of  her  territory,  accord- 


) 


^■..-..'■■a 


jfiJS^ 


iii 


'  »T\\mttiiami§iiMm»,*n\knA 


ms  of  ncrep,  ilic 
U5  square  ruiles, 

entire  territory 
-Jie,  who  visited 

lies  within  the 
e  best  timbered 
timber  is  indis- 
3llings ;  and  to 
ik  for  a  supply, 
le  construction 
lulge  this  taste, 
ost  exclusively 

value  must  be 

tills  Common- 
cents  per  acre, 
dollars;  but  as 
Is,  it  is  highly 
jyment  of  her 
e  the  people  of 
n  of  the  north- 
s  of  the  public 
ES  to  assert  the 
ommon  wealth. 
Legislature,  in 
boundary,  and 
egislature,  has 
'■  a  remarkable 
recognition  of 
il  and  precise 
if  those  limits, 
Id  be  a  matter 
ly  first  official 
the  true  limits 

views  of  the 
1  large  part  of 

the  immediate 
decidedly,  to 
>f  negotiation, 
lation  than  at 
>lary  patience, 
disposition  to 
sks  that  some 
irpose  to  end 
•itory  wrested 
I  annihilated, 
d  claims  of  a 
'ntroversy,  or 
iive  from  the 
ights. 
itory,  accord- 


CAtCllUO    llOlUL   llUUi 


t  «^V*      \J  ^      VfA\^     K^f*       V^ 


luiA)  inyiuanvii 


St.  John's  to  the  highlands,  near  the  iorty-eighth  degree  north  latitude,  and 


CAlCtlUO    I 

St.  John'^ 


J 


EXTRACT  i^'liOJf 

A. 

MAT 


Jih^^.- 


y.y     ^yV   ..  .  //  y^;/         //}/ 


^  /"/  ///'   /J/v//j//  /////A  yyy//r/.  ///"/// /////'V/.j  /// 


1 


J. 


WOJITH  JMIJJIICA, 


X* 


^-^ 


IJY 


^^ 


Jn?  Mitchell. 


/'fJ!Mf  ^ 


',A 


1 

I 

J 


/X/iS  Afa^t  was  C'rul^rtakfn  witA  tAe  J^^roda/wn  ant/  at /At 
^tY/iuiit  (ytAt  /.ortls  6ofnrnissu>nersJor  7mt/f  a/u/  /^lafitatiotts i 
ofidiscki^/'lfy  contffvsedyhmJJrait<//itj,  C/uirts  ant/ /Idua/Si'r- 
ve//s  (^ t/^freti t ^arts  o/'//is  J/t//'fs/ttx  /}i/t>ni'fs  tint/ /'/tinftt/tt'/ts 
iftuJffttnca;  6'reat  /lirt  o/'n'Aft^  /ittit-  ieen  /ttle/y  ttiA:e/t  /ly/Z/t//- 


f»Tl/l.i 


Lort/sfy^i's  f'rt/ers,  tiru/  transrnif/fii  /t>  t/us  (^^'trt'  /fy  //<r  6'tnr///('/:t   ^  &\,f:^^^^ — *v.>-n_-J.  *^ 

(^t/ie  ,utit/  ('o/ff/ues  ant/  ot/iers.  ^'    /'      j/)  //'^\***^     C^^k'^'*'^'"*' 

•  Wr,„/ty/tf'u///tfr.  '/  r/  i-'^    Ml     ^       >V> 


.%■/■///://' /?M. 


'/• 


\ 


QlEliKCj 


1 


SV,//'//"" 


/>«v 


/'>•' 


^5: 


II'miuhi'u/,',/  \       "^  ^ 


.^ 


t1/ 


"1 


11  / 


%^ 


"^ 


* 


■''^"  s^"- 


1 

■1 

if  ^^ 

HHgk 

1  ^ 

'f'^'yirrffl  // 


CAiCllUi9    I 

St.  JohnV 


/hytmt  //v  S./../hix/ti*'ff. 


■'^r^-'-. 


.,;.V:^, 


'    i 


I '. 


to 


"She  asks  the  quiet  and  undisturbe«r possession  of  herterSy,' 


accord- 


tory,  accord- 


3 


[431  ] 


ing  to  the  treaty,  aiul  t'nat  foreign  and  inlrnsive  possession  be  put  nn  cud 
to;  and  by  this  claim  tho  will  abide.  Shn  will  do  noliiiny  rashly,  and  in- 
dulge in  no  spirit  of  ruillification  ;  and  it  will  not  he  nntil  all  hope  of  set* 
llin^r  the  vexed  (jiKistioii  by  negotiation,  and  all  re«.]nests  for  other  aid  arc 
denied  or  neglected,  that  she  will  throw  herself  entirely  upon  her  own  rc- 
sonrces,  and  maintain,  unaided  imd  alone,  her  jnst  rights  in  the  determined 
spirit  of  injured  freemen.  IJnt  those  righis  must  be  vindicated  and  mam- 
tained  ;  and  if  all  appeals  for  aid  and  protection  are  in  vain,  and  her  con- 
stitutional rights  are  disregarded,  forbearance  may  cease  to  be  a  virtue  ; 
and,  in  the  language  of  the  lamented  Lincoln,  Maine  may  *  be  compelled 
to  delilierate  on  an  alterndtive  which  will  test  the  strictness  of  her  principles, 
and  the  firmness  of  her  temper.' " 

Such  is  the  language  of  tlie  C\\\q{  Magistrate  of  that  injured  State ;  and 
it  shows  that  the  spell  which  for  a  period  bound  them  in  silence  has  been 
broken.  Maine  is  now  alive  to  this  subject ;  she  intends  that  her  voice  shall 
be  heard.  And  why  should  not  Massachusetts  speak  out?  We  have  n 
pecuniary  interest  in  tliis  question,  as  great  as  our  firstborn.  We  are  joint 
heirs  with  our  offspring  in  this  heritage;  and  not  only  self-interest,  but 
parental  solicitude  should  prompt  us  to  action,  and  induce  us  to  urge  this 
subject  upon  the  consideration  of  the  Federal  (iovernment.  To  them  bo- 
longs  the  right  of  adjusting  this  difficulty.  And  they  owe  it  to  their  own 
character,  to  the  honor  of  the  nation,  and  the  interests  of  two  independent 
States,  over  which  they  bear  lulo.  and  whose  rightful  guardians  in  this 
respect  they  are,  to  press  this  subject  upon  the  consideration  of  Great 
Britain. 

Rut  if  the  General  Government  will  remain  silent,  or,  by  repeated  con- 
cessions, will  strengthen  the  claims  of  a  foreign  Government,  it  becomes 
Massachusetts  so  far  to  take  this  subject  into  her  own  hands,  as  to  proclaim 
the  grievances  of  an  injured  people  in  the  ears  of  the  nation.  Tliis  Legis- 
lature owe  it  to  themselves,  to  the  honor  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  to  the 
interest  of  their  constituents,  to  call  public  attention  to  the  merits  of  tlii^j 
controversy.  Entertaining  these  views,  the  committee  will  endeavor  to 
spread  before  the  Legislature  the  fi\cts  in  relation  to  this  controversy,  that 
they  may  be  able  to  decide  upon  the  merits  of  our  claim. 

That  this  controverted  question  may  be  the  better  understood  by  the 
Legislature,  two  oficial  maps  are  appended  to  this  report.  The  first  is 
known  by  the  name  of  Mitchell's  map,  and  is  allowed  by  both  Government.s 
to  have  been  before  the  commissioners  of  the  two  nations,  at  their  public 
interviews  during  the  pendency  of  the  treaty  of  1783.  It  represents  the 
topography  of  the  country,  as  it  was  understood  by  the  high  contracting 
parties  at  that  time.  The  second  is  designated  map  A,  and  contains  a  just 
delineation  of  the  water  courses,  and  of  the  boundary  lines  as  they  are  now 
contended  for  by  the  two  nations.  These  maps  differ  in  several  respects 
from  each  other  ;  but  they  are  both  official  documents,  agreed  upon  by  the 
convention  of  September,  1827,  and  accredited  by  the  respective  parties  ; 
the  latter  as  containing  a  delineation  of  the  actual  topography  of  the  coun- 
try, and  the  former  of  the  topography  as  it  was  understood  by  the  framers 
of  the  treaty  of  1783. 

It  will  be  seen  by  map  A,  which  is  cubmilted  as  a  part  of  this  report, 
that  the  line,  aS  described  by  the  treaty  and  claimed  by  the  United  States, 
extends  north  from  the  monument  at  tiie  source  of  the  St.  Ooix,  across  the 
St.  John's  to  the  highlands,  near  the  forty-eighth  degree  north  latitude,  and 


[431  J  4 

thence  along  those  highlands  to  ihu  head  of  Conncclicut  river;  and  that 
tlio  hne  as  claimed  by  (iieat  Britain  conuncnrcs  at  the  siame  nionnnient, 
and  runs  north  to  nn  isolated  monntnin,  culled  Mars  Hill,  south  of  the  St. 
John's,  and  thence  westerly  l)etween  the  sources  of  the  waters  which  flow 
into  that  river  on  the  north,  and  the  Penobscot  on  the  south,  till  it  unites 
with  the  line  claimed  by  the  United  States,  a  little  north  of  the  forty  sixth 
decree  of  north  latitude.  There  is  also  a  ditieronce  in  the  two  lines  in  re- 
lation to  the  northwest  head  of  Connecticut  river,  which  will  be  seen  on 
map  A,  near  the  forty-fifth  degree  of  north  latitude.  This  map  will  also 
show  the  line  recommended  by  the  King  of  the  Netherlands. 

Having  exhibited  the  lines  as  contended  for  by  the  two  Governments,  the 
committee  will  now  attempt  to  show  the  justice  and  strength  of  our  claim. 
This  controversy  must  turn  upon  the  location  of  the  following  points  des- 
cribed in  the  treaty:  The  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  the  highlands, 
and  the  northwestcrnmost  head  of  Connectiait  river.  The  coramiitee  will 
also  state  in  advance,  that  the  province  now  known  by  the  name  of  New 
Brunswick  was  formerly  included  in  Nova  Scotia,  and  consequently  all 
the  ancient  docimients  which  speak  of  Nova  Scotia  apply  to  the  present 
province  of  New  Brunswick,  as  well  as  to  that  portion  of  the  original  ter- 
ritory which  still  bnars  the  name  of  Nova  Scotia. 

With  these  preliminary  statements,  the  committee  will  call  the  attention 
of  the  Legislature  to  the  facts  in  the  case. 

The  treaty  of  1783  fixes  the  boundary  between  the  United  States  and 
Great  Britain.  It  commences  its  description  of  the  boundary  at  the  "north- 
west angle  of  Nova  Scotia,"  and  declares  that  the  line  extends  "along  the 
highlands  which  divide  those  rivers  that  empty  themselves  into  the  St. 
Lawrence,  from  those  that  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean,  to  the  nortwestorn- 
most  head  of  Connecticut  river."  After  pursuing  this  description,  and 
giving  the  boundary  of  the  United  States  on  the  north,  west,  and  south,  the 
treaty  contains  these  words  :  "  East  by  a  line  to  be  drawn  aloufj  the  mid- 
dle of  the  river  St.  Croix,  from  its  mouth  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy  to  its  source, 
and  from  Us  Source  directly  north  to  the  aforesaid  highlands,  which  divide 
the  rivers  that  fall  .into  the  Atlantic  ocean  from  those  that  fall  into  the  St. 
Lawrence." 

This  presents  the  general  outline  of  the  boundary.  But  in  order  to  i\ 
correct  understanding  of  the  subject,  it  is  important  to  inquire  whether  the 
metes  and  bounds  described  in  the  treaty  were  understood  at  the  time  the 
treaty  was  made.  It  is  a  fact,  authenticated  by  the  commissioners  who 
signed  the  treaty,  that  they  had  before  them,  during  the  negotiation,  the 
map  known  by  the  name  of  Mitchell's  map.  The  depositions  of  President 
Adanas  and  Governor  Jay,  together  with  a  letter  of  Dr.  Franklin,  state  ex- 
pressly that  the  commissioners  at  their  public  conferences  had  this  map 
before  them,  and  it  was  referred  to  when  describitig  the  boundary  in  ques- 
tion. This  map,  or  an  extract  therefrom,  is  herewith  submitted,  and  has 
delineated  upon  it  the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence,  and  a  ridge 
of  highlands  commencing  at  the  north  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  and  running 
westerly,  dividing  the  rivers  before  mentioned  from  those  that  fall  mto  the 
sea  through  the  St.  John's. 

But  there  is  a  great  variety  of  other  evidence  which  goes  to  explain  this 
boundary,  and  to  show  that  the  description  contained  in  the  treaty  was  well 
understood  by  Great  Britain  at  the  time  the  treaty  was  ratified.  As  early 
as  1603.  Henry  lY.,  of  France,  granted  to  De  Monts  all  the  country  in 


I 


It  river;  and  il/ut 
same  iMomimenf, 
,  soiiili  of  the  Si. 
aters  which  How 
uth,  till  it  unites 
[>t'  the  forty  sixth 
3  two  lines  in  ro- 
i  will  be  seen  on 
lis  map  will  also 
ids. 

Governments,  the 
:th  of  our  claim. 
wiiifr  points  des- 
,  the  hiff/i/artdSf 
3  commijtee  will 
3  nanio  of  New 
consequently  all 
V  to  the  present 
he  original  lei- 

nll  the  attention 

ited  States  and 
y  at  the  "north- 
ids  "  alon?  the 
3S  info  the  St. 
le  nortwestorn- 
escription,  and 
and  south,  the 
alontr  the  niid- 
ly  loits  source, 
I,  which  divide 
ill  into  the  St. 

t  in  order  to  a 
'0  whether  the 
it  the  time  the 
lissioners  who 
egotiation,  the 
s  of  President 
ildin.  state  ex- 
had  this  map 
"dary  in  ques- 
itted,  and  has 
B.  and  a  ridge 
I  and  running 
t  fall  mto  the 

>  explain  this 
Baty  was  well 
'd.  As  early 
e  country  in 


'i| 


♦  This  river  falls  into  theGulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  and  must  not  be  confounded  with  one  of  the 
same  name  which  falb  into  the  sea  through  the  Bay  of  Funcly. 


i.'^. 


-  iimyiiJiii      iniiiiM    '-\si 


SdillL 


— q»m-  -  Wc  —  TiBiiiir:::n 


-  rniiiBi^ 


im,.M  -  -■  irrii       imiminiii  -  -  Wiijibij: —  hiiimiimii 


^.V  

•  icrmn     )r.,'iiinii    '  ijiii5iiiir3iIllBr. ' 


^' 


1 

r 

4      H 


ta- 


NT  AT  K   or   3J  A  1  X  E 

/ 
S/iciii/i//  ,'//t /^tir'/'i'//  t>/'i'/t/i/  Sfiz/i'  /<'  ir/ii'-/>  t'/u// /In'.'/ii;/  ''//is '■/,///// 

,  ///'///,'';■',//.:,■//.'  //,,/'/'//■'/,"'.    //!-./  A. '/"///• 
/■''i //'r//f '/,-./ //("/.'i'  '/'/>■'   /'/A-;//     .,'// 1 /''','/,),  /■■) 


iiiiiiiiiiiii     ■iiimii  ■  fpitiiir' 


r-k 


y. . 


.\,   .VrH/lwiS/    f)ii://i   ('/'  A'ri/,-  X-r/.-'i.'.i/.y  !■  •■if>u/fi/ /in  />{•:'/  /•     f'/il/:''  S.'"fi'i. 
li   ,  i  'firth iv(.tt  ati;//f  v/'  .  W'r,/  Scottn.a.i ,,  ///ffii/'ifji'rfn-  (''t'.'r  /Ir/i'ii/ii . 
i  .  .  I  'i>rt/iiv(^ffrnmojt  head  o/'  ('cufuxtirul /iami.1  twitmc/fd  Jhr  Ay 

/'■na/.  Jirihim. 
1).  .  \urt/tiei:jti-ni7»{'St  ///■////  /yy/w//iC''''r.'//  AViYr.i/s  iv/Ui'Hifi</ /' r  /-v 
77i<'  fnitff^  Sfii/ij. 
y/ie  (/ivi'n  r/i/i'itr  /Anfi'f.f  ////•  /i'i>itf/'//irr  /.i//c.<is  /'.tinirii/  hy  f/ic  /.'.S'. 
/'he  fft^  /r//>/ir  /Jr/tufes  //t/'  /Jf://fii/ttrv  Ai/ii'iis  r/nt'/nfif  />//  /■'./>. 
T/if    }'f//fnr  /t /If     /s  t/iiit     o/'  //le    .^/A//l^^•  \ 


^    I    4f 


uk-^^ 


^1  (        "'■> 


I-;  \> 


r  ^^-  s 


>--1ss^xi  I 


imlf'jJL, 


'^'n. 


OTr^ 


K 


'-(" 


1  j 
(J     lifl^L         \ 

i 

»,^w!''i 

"-J 

j^^i^\-^  -  - 

m^M^^ 

~-r- — 

;i- 

'jljt\0fS^^^^  —'=: 

K|f5f 

F' 

}tW//f/t, 


■to  ..',0 


Stalf   or  Miles 


V     -^      ^"^      "^ 


a.  1603,  Henry  IV.,  ot  France,  granted  ,„  .je  mom  «u  me  co.,„.,y  .„ 


country  m 


5  [431] 

North  America  between  the  fortieth  and  forty-sixth  degrees  of  north  lati- 
tude, by  the  name  of  Acadie.  .  De  Monts  find  his  followers  commenced  a 
settlement  on  this  grant,  but  were  dislodged  by  the  British  in  1613.  In 
1621,  James  1.,  of  England,  granted  to  Sir  William  Alexander  all  the  lands 
of  the  continent  now  known  by  the  names  of  Nova  Scotia,  New  Bruns- 
wick, and  a  part  of  Lower  Canada.  The  western  boundary  of  this  grant 
is  described  as  commencing  at  Cape  Sable,  crossing  the  Buy  of  Funay  "  to 
the  river  Holy  Cross  or  St.Croix,  and  to  the  furthest  source  or  spring  upon 
the  western  branch  of  the  same  ;  thence,  by  an  imaginary  direct  line,  to  be 
drawn  or  run  through  the  country,  or  over  the  land  to  the  north,  to  the 
first  bay,  river,  or  spring  emptying  itself  into  the  great  river  of  Canada  ; 
and  from  thence,  running  to  the  east  along  the  shores  of  the  said  river  of 
Canada." 

The  territory  included  in  this  grant  was  bounded  on  the  west  by  the  St. 
Croix,  and  a  line  drawn  north  from  its  source  to  the  great  river  of  Canada 
or  the  St.  Lawrence.  Nova  Scotia,  for  this  was  the  name  given  to  the 
grant  to  Sir  William,  was  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  St.  Lawrence  ;  and 
this  boundary  continued  until  1763.  From  1621  to  1763,  Nova  Scotia  or 
Acadie  was  alternately  possessed  by.  England  and  France,  and  knew  no 
other  northern  boundary  than  the  St.  Lawrence. 

In  1691,  by  the  charter  of  William  and  Mary,  the  real  province  of  Mas- 
sachusetts Bay  was  created,  consisting  of  the  former  provinces  of  Massachu- 
setts Bay,  New  Plymouth,  Nova  Scotia,  District  of  Maine,  and  all  the  land 
to  the  great  river  of  Canada  or  the  St.  Lawrence.  Massachusetts  exercised 
some  jurisdiction  over  Nova  Scotia,  appointed  some  civil  and  other  officers, 
but  owing  to  the  extent  of  her  territory  and  other  causes,  she,  in  a  few 
years,  gave  it  up,  and  the  British  Government  made  it  a  separate  province. 

We  have  already  said  that  from  the  grant  in  1621  to  1763,  Nova  Scotia 
was  boinided  north  by  the  St.  Lawrence.  Though  this  province  had  been 
the  subject  of  grants,  of  conquests,  and  cessions,  the  British  Government 
always  recognised  this  river  as  the  northern  boundary,  never  extending 
their  claim  beyond,  and  never  stopping  short  of  it.  In  1763,  by  the  treaty 
of  Paris,  France  ceded  both  Nova  Scotia  and  Canada  to  Great  Britain  in 
full  sovereignty. 

When  both  of  these  provinces  became  the  property  of  Great  Britain,  she 
thought  proper  to  erect  the  northern  part  of  Nova  Scotia  and  a  part  of 
Canada  into  a  separate  Government  by  the  name  of  Quebec.  The  King 
by  his  proclamation  bearing  date  October  7,  1763,  established  this  Govern- 
ment, and  bounded  it  as  follows  :  "  On  the  Labrador  coast  by  the  river  St. 
John,  and  from  thence  by  a  line  drawn  from  the  head  of  that  river,  through 
Lake  St.  John,  to  the  south  end  of  Lake  Nipissim,  from  whence  the  said  line 
crossing  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  and  the  Lake  Champlain  in  forty-five  degrees 
of  north  latitude,  passino-  alon^  the  highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  thai 
empty  themselves  into  the  said  river  St.  Lawrence  from  those  which  fall 
into  the  sen,  and  also  along-  the  north  coast  of  the  Bay  des  Chaleurs.  and 
the  coast  of  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  to  Cape  Hosiers,  and  from  thence 
crossing  ttie  mouth  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  by  the  west  end  of  the  island 
Anticosti,  terminates  at  the  aforesaid  river  St.  John."* 

From  this  description  we  may  easily  learn  the  southern  boundary  of 
Quebec,  the  only  boinidary  which  relates  to  the  question  before  us.     On 

♦  This  river  Tails  into  theGalf  of  St.  Lawrence,  and  must  not  be  confounded  with  one  of  the 
same  name  which  falls  into  the  sea  through  the  Bay  of  Fundy. 


■ilM 


i 


! 


[431]  6 

leaving'  tke  forty-fiflli  degree  of  latitude  it  passes  {ilong' — liot  tiie  highlands 
generally,  but  the  highlands  specially,  '•  the  hi^-Jilands  which  divide  the 
rivers  that  empty  themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence,  f mm  those  that  fall 
into  the  sea."  Hero  we  have  a  definition  of  the  highlands  :  they  are  the 
highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  which  run  in  opposite  directions,  inio  the 
St.  Lawrence  on  the  one  side,  and  the  sea  on  the  other.  IJut  this  is  not  all : 
this  line,  or  rather  its  location,  is  further  described  ;  it  passes  nlov^  the  north 
coast  of  the  Bay  of  Chalehrs.  By  a  recurrence  to  the  subjoined  maps,  it 
will  be  seen  that  such  a  line  must  run  north  of  the  forty-eighth  degree  of 
north  latitude.  Prior  to  the  erection  of  the  Government  of  Quebec,  Nova 
Scotia  extended  north  to  the  river  St.  Lawrence ;  but  the  proclaniatiou 
varied  this  boundary,  by  transferring  it  from  tlie  river  to  the  source  of  tho 
streams  that  How  into  it ;  leaving  the  Metis,  the  Riniousky,  the  Green,  and 
several  otlier  rivers  on  the  north,  and  the  waters  of  the  Androscoggin, 
the  Kennebec,  the  Penobscot,  the  St.  John's^  and  the  Ristigouche  on  the 
south. 

The  boundary,  thus  established  in  creating  the  province  of  Quebec  has 
often  been  recognised  by  the  acts  of  the  Crown  and  the  Parliament.  In 
1763,  Montague  Wilmot  was  appoinied  Governor  of  Nova  Scotia,  with  a 
commission  describing  his  territory  as  follows :  "  Bounded  on  the  west- 
ward by  a  line  drawn  from  Cape  Sable  across  the  entrance  of  the  Bay  ol 
Fundy  to  the  mouth  of  the  river  iSl.  Croix,  by  the  said  river  to  its  source, 
and  by  a  line  drawn  north  from  thence  to  the  southern  boundary  of  ovr 
colony  of  Quebec  :  to  the  northward  by  said  boundary,  as  far  us  the  west- 
ern extremity  of  the  Bay  des  Chaleurs,  c^'c."  In  the  commission  to  Wil- 
liam Campbell,  in  1767,  and  in  the  commission  to  Francis  Leggec,  in  177L 
the  same  boundary  is  recognised,  and  described  in  the  same  language. 

This  boundary  which  had  been  established  and  recognised  by  the  Crown, 
was  recognised  and  confirmed  by  an  act  of  Parliament  in  the  Uth  of  the 
reign  of  George  111.,  (1774.)  That  act  which  relates  to  the  province  of 
Quebec,  describes  it  as  containing  "all  the  territories,  islands,  and  coun- 
tries in  North  America  belonging  to  the  Crown  of  Great  Britain,  Immided 
on  the  south  by  a  line  from,  the  Bay  of  Chalenrs,  along  the  highlands 
which  divide  the  rivers  which  empty  themsi  Ivcs  inio  the  »S7.  Lau'7'encc,fro7n 
those  which  fall  into  the  sea." 

This  was  the  established  line  of  boundary  at  tlie  time  of  the  treaty  of 
1783.  The  southern  boundary  of  Quebec  and  the  northern  boundary  of 
Nova  Scotia  pursued  the  same  line,  and  passed  from  the  northern  coast  of 
the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  westerly  along  the  highlands  which  divide  the  waters 
of  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  of  the  Ristigouche  and  St.  John  With 
these  facts,  and  Mitchell's  map  l;cfore  them,  the  treaty  of  1783,  acknow- 
ledging our  independence,  was  signed  and  ratified.  That  treaty,  in  its  first 
article,  acknowledges  the  independence  of  New  Hampshire,  Massachusetts, 
and  the  other  American  States.  This  of  itself  would  decide  the  boundary ; 
for  tho  northern  boundary  of  JMassachusctts  and  New  Hampshire  was  the 
southern  boundary  of  Quebec.  But  this  article  goes  further,  and  provides, 
that,  to  prevent  "  all  disputes,  which  might  arise  in  future,  on  the  subject 
of  the  boundaries  of  the  said  United  States,  it  is  hereby  agreed  and  de- 
clared, that  the  following  are  and  shall  be  their  boundaries,  to  wit:" 

Article  2.  "  Fro?n  the  nortliwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  to  wit:  that  an- 
gle which  is  formed,  by  a  line  drawn  due  north  from  the  .source  of  (he  St. 
Croix  river,  to  the  highlands  wltich  divide  those  rivers  that  empty  thvm- 


to  th\ 


ii  i 


1 


[431] 


liot  tiio  hiirliiands 
which  divide  Uw 
ni  thnae  that  fall  \ 
lis  :  th(;y  ;,re  iIk;  ; 
'lections,  iijio  the  i 
Jilt  this  is  not  all  : 
ss  nh)v^  the  north  . 
iil^joined  maps,  it 
:-ei^hth  degree  of 
of  Qnebec,  Nova 
tlie  proc]nn)atioii  ' 
tiie  soin-cc  of  the  • 
h  tlie  Green,  and  \ 
^'i  Andro.'=co"-o-in    i 
ti^^oiiche  on'^'iiio'  ' 

3  of  Quebec  has  ^ 
Pavhament.     hi 
a  Scotia,  with  a 
-d  on  the  west- 
:g  of  the  Bay  of    I 
vcr  to  its  soi'rre,    ■ 
loifttdari/  of  our   ^ 
fcr  as  the  west-    \ 
imission  to  VVil-    j 
•eggee,  in  177].    • 
e  language.        '    ; 
i  by  the  Crown, 
tile  Uih  of  the    i 
ti)e  province  of   i 
inds,  and  conn-    | 
ii'iftiin,  hounded    \ 
the  highlands    [ 
'^(iwrcH(:c,Jro7n 

f  tlie  treaty  of 
*n  boundary  of 
rfhern  coast  of 
nde  tlie  wnters 
.Jolin      Willi 
1 7S'^,  acknow- 
'^^Y:  in  its  first 
Vlassachusetis, 
tile  boundary; 
shire  was  the 
and  provides, 
>'i  the  subject 
rreed  and  "de- 
wit:" 

wit:  thalav- 

''e  of  the  <St. 

mptf/  (hvm- 


sciKSf  into  iho  /S7.  Lawrc7fcr,frojn  /hose  vhich  fall  info  the  Atlantic  ocean, 
to  ths  north WL'stc'i'uniosi  hend  of  Contu'cticnt  river ;  thence  down  alouff  the 
mid't/e  of  that  rivar  to  ih.n  furfy-ffth.  deLsree  of  north  latilud:,'^  ^'c.  "  Bast 
0,'/  a  line  to  hii  drawn,  olon^  ilia  middle  of  the  rivet  <SV.  Croix,  from  its 
'tnonth  in  the  lUiij  'f  I'^tndy,  to  its  source,  <tudfrom  its  source  directly  north 
to  the  aforesaid  hifrhlauds  wliich  diride  the  rivers  that  fall  into  the  Atlan- 
tic ocean  from  those  which  fall  into  the  river  St.  Lawrence." 

Siicij  is  the  language  of  the  treaty,  and  it  seems  to  your  committee  thnt 
no  deseriptioii  can  be  plainer.  'J'he  description  begins  at  the  "northwest 
antile  of  Nova  Scotia,"  and  it  explains  and  fixes  this  point  with  the  greatest 
accuracy  of  which  the  case  admits.  ''From  the  northwest  isngle  of  Nova 
Scf)tia,  to  wit:  that  angle  which  is  formed  by  a  line  drawn  due 
north  from  the  source  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  to  the  highlands."  What 
angle  is  here  intended  ?  Why,  an  an^le  formed  by  a  line  due  north  from 
the  St.  Croi.K  interseoting  a  line  along  the  highlands.  This  line  along  the 
highlands  must  run  nearly  east  and  west ;  it  commences  north  of  the  Bay 
of  Chaleitrs,  and  passes  along  near  the  ibrtyeighfh  degree  of  north  lati- 
tude, intersecting  the  line  drawn  due  north  from  the  St.  Croix,  and  continu- 
ing westerly  aloufj  the  highlands.  And  that  there  should  be  no  mistake 
coticornina:  these  highlands,  they  afe  expressly  declared  to  be  highlands 
which  divide  the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  which 
empty  themselves  into  the  sea,  or  xVtlantic  ocean. 

Tliis  description  was  well  understood  at  the  time.  The  British  com- 
missioners and  the  iJritish  Government  must  have  been  aware  of  its  loca- 
tion ;  they  Iciipw  the  soutljern  boiuidary  of  Quebec ;  they  knew  the 
northern  boundary  of  Nova  Scotia.  And  this  description  of  the  boun- 
dary U\  introduced  to  make  all  fhinffs  certain;  the  declaration  in  the 
treaty  is  this  :  "  And  that  all  disputes  wliich  might  arise  in  future  on 
the  subject  of  the  boundaries  of  the  said  United  States  may  be  pre- 
vented, it  is  hereby  agreed  and  declared,  that  the  following  are  and  shall 
he  their  boundaries."     Then  follows  the  description  already  given. 

Now  how  is  this  treaty  to  be  interpreted  ?  Vattel  says,  "  The  first  gen- 
eral maxim  of  interpretation  is,  that  it  is  not  permitted  to  interpret  what  has 
no  nof;d  of  interpretation.  When  an  act  is  conceived  in  clear  and  precise 
terms,  when  the  sense  is  manilest,  and  leads  to  nothing  absurd,  there  can 
Ik!  no  reason  to  refuse  th(i  sense  which  this  treaty  naturally  presents.  To 
go  elsewhere  in  search  of  conjectures,  in  order  to  restrain  or  extinguish  it, 
is  to  ciidoavor  to  elude  it.  If  this  dangerous  method  be  once  admitted, 
there  is  no  act  which  it  will  not  render  useless.  Let  the  brightest  light 
sl>i'ie  o;i  ;V  '!:"  parts  of  th?  piece :  let  it  be  expressed  in  terms  the  most 
clear  atid  determinate — iill  this  siiall  be  of  no  use,  if  it  be  allowed  to  search 
for  foreign  reasons  in  order  to  maintain  what  cannot  be  found  in  the  sense 
it  iial'irally  pp'Si'iits  " 

Now,  can  any  reasonable  doubt  arise  asto  the  meaning  of  the  treaty  ?  Is 
not  the  bDUiifJary  line  fixed  with  as  much  certainty  as  the  nature  of  the 
ca.-e  will  allow  l  W«)  say  it  is.  Vi'e  pronoinice  this  sentence  with  confi- 
dence, because  it  is  borne  out  by  the  treaty  itself.  We  pronounce  it  with 
confKl.Mirf.  because  the  British  Government  understood  its  locality.  W^e 
jjronouiico  it  with  coniidcnce,  because  Great  Britain  herself  acknowledged 
the  very  line  for  which  wc  contend  to  be  the  true  boundary  for  the  space 
of  forty  years. 

There  is  almost  an  endless  mass  of  documentary  evidence  all  |?oing  to 
confirm  our  claim.    Gallatin  and  Preble,  in  their  statement  submitted  to 


[431] 


8 


;i 


the  King  of  the  Netherlands,  give  us  the  titles  of  tiinetocn  mnps,  eighteen 
of  which  were  published  in  London  and  one  in  Dublin,  between  the  years 
17G3  and  1781 ,  and  though  these  mnps  differ  in  some  nonessential  points, 
the  commissioners  say,  "  But  in  every  instance,  ihe  course  ol'tlie  hue  iVoni  tlic 
source  of  the  river  St.  Croix  is  northward  ;  in  every  instance  that  line  crosses 
the  river  St.  John,  and  terminatesat  the  highlands  in  which  the  rivers  that  hill 
into  the  river  St.  Lawrence  have  their  sources  ;  in  eveiy  instance  the  north- 
west angle  of  Nova  Scotia  is  laid  down  on  those  highlands^  and  where  the 
north  line  terminates ;  in  every  instance  the  highlands,  from  that  point  to 
the  Connecticut  river,  divide  the  waters  that  fall  into  the  St.  Lawrence, 
from  the  tributary  streams  of  the  river  St  John,  and  from  the  other  rivers 
that  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean." 

The  maps  were  all  published  after  the  Government  of  Quebec 
was  created,  and  before  the  treaty  of  17S3  was  signed.  And  is  it 
possible  that  their  commissioners  who  signed  the  treaty,  or  the  British  Gov- 
ernment, who  ratitied  it,  we-e  ignorant  of  these  maps  7  But  if  that  were 
the  case,  no  one  can  pretend  that  they  were  ignorant  of  maps  which  were 
published  in  London  in  the  interval  between  the  signing  of  the  provisional 
articles  in  1782,  and  the  concluding  of  the  definitive  treaty  in  1783. 

The  American  commissioners  above  quoted  say,  "during  the  interval 
that  elapsed  between  the  signing  of  the  preliminaries  and  of  the  definitive 
treaty,  four  maps  of  the  United  States  were  published  in  London,  one  of 
which,  at  least,  appears  to  have  been  intended  as  illustrative  of  the  debates 
in  Parliament  on  the  subject  of  the  boundaries.  These  maps  are  an  evi- 
dence of  the  contemporaneous  understanding  of  the  boundaries  of  the 
United  States,  according  to  the  preliminaries.  In  all  of  them,  those  boun- 
daries are  laid  down  as  now  claimed  by  the  United  Slates,  and  are  the 
same  with  those  delineated  in  the  preceding  maps,  as  the  bound;iries  of  the 
provinces  of  Quebec  and  Nova  Scotia.  Seven  other  maps  of  the  same 
character,  published  during  the  same  and  the  ensuing  year,  afford  addition- 
al proof  of  that  understanding;  and  evidence  is  not  wanting  that  it  con- 
tinued to  prevail  in  England  for  many  subsequent  years." 

We  have  already  seen  that  all  the  official  acts  of  the  Britisii  Govern- 
ment, from  the  erection  of  the  colony  of  Quebec  to  the  treaty  of  1783,  re- 
cognised tha  very  'me  for  which  we  contend.  This  shows  that  the  line  of 
boundary  was  well  understood  at  the  time  of  making  the  treaty,  and  the 
subsequent  acts  of  that  Government  prove,  most  conclusively,  that  this  was 
the  case.  In  1784,  the  year  next  succeeding  the  treaty  in  question,  Tho- 
mas Carleton  was  appointed  Governor  of  New  Brunswick.  In  his  com- 
mission, the  boundary  of  his  colony  is  described  as  follows  :  '•  Bounded  on 
the  wesiivnrd  by  the  mouth  of  the  river  St.  Croi.i;  by  the  river,  to  its  .source, 
and  by  a  line  drawn  due  north,  from  thence  to  the  .wnthern  boundary  of 
our  province  of  Quebec,  to  the  noithvmrd  by  the  aaid  boundary  as  far  as 
the  western  extremity  of  the  Bay  des  Chakurs,  to  the  eastward  by  the 
said  bay  and  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence." 

Here  is  the  same  boundary  recognised  that  was  well  known  before  the 
treaty,  and  it  goes  to  confirm  us  in  the  o()inion  we  have  already  expressed. 
If  cotemporar.eoas  construction  could  ever  decid«5  the  meaning  of  an  in- 
strument, the  question  before  us  is  settled  by  the  commission  granted  the 
year  succeeding  the  ratification  of  the  treaty.  But  this  cotemporaneous 
construction  does  not  depend  upon  a  single  act.  The  conmiission  above 
quoted  gives  the  north  and  west  boundary  of  New  Brunswick ;  two 
years  subsequently,  viz:  in  1786,  Sir  Guy  Carleton  was  appointed  Gover- 


nor of  I 

provinl 

leurs, 

selves 

lantic 

III 
John  (I 
Earl  ol 
each  o( 


0 


[4JI  J 


mnps,  eighteen 
tweeii  the  years 
esseii  I  jnl  points, 
lie  liiif  l\oiu  tJic 
Jinl  line  crosses 
t' rivers  that  (ii II 
aiicetljL'iiorlh- 
and  where  the 
n  that  point  to 
St.  Lawrence, 
le  other  rivers 

t  of  Quebec 
I.  And  is  it 
e  Briiisli  Gov- 
t  if  that  were 
s  which  were 
lie  provisional 

1783. 

?  the  interval 
the  definitive 
'iidon,  one  of 
•f  the  debates 
i  are  an  evi- 
iluries  of  the 
,  those  boun- 

and  are  the 
^diiries  of  the 
of  the  same 
ordaddition- 
r  that  it  con- 

sh  Govern- 
of  1783,  re- 
t  the  line  of 
fy,  and  the 
hat  this  was 
sfion,  Tho- 
his  coni- 
'^ounded  on 

0  lis  soitrce, 
mndary  of 

1  asfjr  as 
ard  by  the 

before  the 

expressed. 
1,  of  an  in- 
[lanted  the 
ipora  neons 
sion  above 

ick ;    two 
'd  Gover- 


nor of  (Quebec,  with  a  commission  giving  the  southern  boundary  of  that 
province  as  follows :  "  Bounded  on  the  south  by  a  line  from  the  Bay  of  Cha- 
leiirs,  along'  the  highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  that  empty  them- 
selves  into  (he  rivtr  >St.  Lawrence  from  those  which  fall  into  the  At- 
lantic ocean  to  the  northwesternniost  head  of  Connecticut  river.''^ 

In  1807,  James  Henry  Croigf,  in  1811.  Sir  George  Prevost,  in  1816,  Sir 
John  Coape  Sherbrooke,  in  1818,  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  and  in  1819,  the 
Earl  of  ])alhousic,  were  appointed  Governors  of  New  Brunswick  ;  and  in 
each  of  their  commissions,  we  find  the  same  description  of  boundary — west 
by  a  line  due  north  to  the  highlands,  or  the  southern  boundary  of  Quebec, 
and  this  southern  boundary  is  described  as  coincident  with  the  Bay  of 
Chaleurs.  During  the  same  period  the  commissions  of  the  Governors  of 
the  Canadas  recognised  the  same  boundary  Now,  if  the  uninterrupted 
admission  of  Great  Britain  from  1783  to  1819  amounts  to  anything,  then 
we  may  pronounce  with  certainty  that  justice  and  equity  are  on  the  side  of 
the  United  States  in  this  controversy. 

Nor  are  the  above  the  only  concessions  of  the  British  Government. 
Under  the  treaty  of  amity,  commerce,  and  navigation,  concluded  in  1794, 
commissioners  were  appointed  by  the  two  nations  to  decide  "what  river 
was  truly  intended  under  the  name  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  mentioned  in 
the  treaty  of  peace."  The  very  fact  that  no  other  question  was  raised  at 
th  if  time  is  an  admission  by  both  parties  that  the  rest  of  the  boundary  was 
well  understood.  In  fact,  the  British  commissioners  under  that  treaty 
allowed  expressly,  that  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia  was  upon  the 
highlands  north  of  the  St.  John's  and  near  the  sources  of  the  rivers  that 
flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence.  The  British  agent,  in  his  argument  to  the 
commissioners  appointed  under  the  treaty  of  1794,  uses  this  language : 
"  The  limits  of  the  province  of  Nova  Scotia  at  the  time  of  the  treaty  of 
peace  were  the  same  that  were  established  when  the  province  was  an- 
ciently and  originally  created  and  named,  in  every  respect,  excepting  the 
island  of  St.  John,  and  the  northern  boundary  line,  which,  by  the  creation 
of  the  province  of  Quebec,  after  the  peace  of  1763,  was  altered  from  the 
southern  bank  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  to  the  highlands  described  in  the 
article  of  the  treaty  of  peace  now  under  consideration ;  and  further,  hat 
with  these  exceptions,  there  never  was  but  one  and  the  same  tract  of 
country  and  islands  that  formed  the  province  of  Nova  Scotia." 

Here  the  British  agent  acknowledges  that,  at  the  time  of  the  treaty,  the 
province  of  Nova  Scotia  was  bounded  north  by  the  highlands.  Again, 
lie  says,  "  The  province  of  Nova  Scotia  at  the  time  of  the  treaty  of  1783, 
was  bounded  to  the  northward  by  the  southern  boundary  of  the  province 
of  Quebec,  which  boundary  was  established  by  proclamation  in  1763,  and 
confirmed  by  an  act  of  Parliament  the  same  year,  and  included  all  the 
countries  bounded  on  the  swith  by  a  line  from  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  along 
the  highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  that  empty  themselves  into  the  ISt. 
Lawrence  from  those  which  fall  into  the  seaH^ 

He  also  admits,  throughout  his  argument,  that  the  line  north  from  the 
St.  Croix  must  intersect  these  highlands,  and  that  this  intersection,  or 
these  highlands,  must  be  north  of  the  St.  John's  and  near  the  Bay  of  Cha- 
leurs. He  tells  us  that  it  would  be  desirable  to  have  the  line  so  establish- 
ed that  all  rivers  which  have  their  sources  should  also  have  their  mouths 
in  the  territory  of  the  same  nation.  He  contends  for  the  western  branch 
of  the  Scaudiac,  because  that  would  leave  all  the  rivers  which  rise  in  the 
United  States  to  empty  themselves  within  the  States,  and  with  the  excep- 


HMWMii 


[431] 


10 


tion  of  the  St.  John's,  would  secure  to  Great  Brilain  llic  samo  ndvniilnc:?. 
Ilis  words  nre,  "A  line  due  north  iVom  the  source  of  the  western  or  tuiiin 
branch  of  the  Scaudiac  or  St.  Croix  will  fully  secure  this  oiioct  to  the 
United  States  in  every  instance,  and  also  to  Great  Urilain  in  all  instances 
except  in  that  of  the  river  St.  Juhu,  wherein  it  becomes  i/npassible  by 
reason  that  the  source  of  this  river  is  to  the  westward^  vot  only  of  the 
V'estern  boundary  line  of  Nova  Scotia,  but  of  the  sources  nf  (he  Pe- 
nobscot, and  even  of  the  Kennebec ;  so  that  this  north  line  ?nust  of  ncces' 
sily  cross  the  St.  Johii's  ;  but  it  will  cross  it  in  a  part  of  it  almost  at  the 
foot  of  the  highlands,  and  where  it  ceases  to  be  navigable.  JJnt  if  a  north 
line  is  traced  from  the  source  of  the  east  branch,  it  will  not  only  cross  the 
St.  John^s  within  about  fifty  miles  from  Fredericton,  the  metropolis  of 
New  Brunswick,  but  will  cut  off  the  sources  of  (he  rivers  which  fall  into 
the  Bay  of  Chalcnrs,  if  not  of  many  others  uhinh  fall  into  the  Gulf  oj 
St.  LaivrenceJ^  Great  Britain  now  contends  that  the  highlands  intended 
by  the  treaty  must  be  on  the  south  side  of  the  St.  John's.  But  it  will  bo 
seen  that  her  conmissioners,  in  1797,  allowed  that  whatever  was  assumed 
as  the  true  St.  Croix,  the  north  line  must  of  necessity  croxs  the  St.  John^s. 
The  agent  objects  to  the  eastern  branch,  not  because  this  north  line  would 
cross  the  river  St.  John,  but  because  it  would  cross  it  within  lifty  miles 
of  tlie  capital  of  New  Brunswick,  and  would  cut  off  the  sources  of  the 
rivers  which  fall  into  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs.  This  amounts  to  a  positive 
confession  that  our  line  must  extend  north  to  highland  near  the  forty- 
eighth  degree  of  north  latitude.  The  British  agent  does  not  ol)ject  to  this 
line  because  it  extends  .^o  far  north  as  to  cross  the  rivers  that  fail  into  the 
Bay  of  Chaleurs,  but  ho  founds  his  objection  on  the  ground  that  it  extends 
so  far  east. 

We  have,  then,  in  the  establishment  of  the  true  St.  Croix,  the  confession 
of  the  British  commissioners  not  only,  but  of  the  British  Government 
itself,  that  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia  must  l)e  north  of  the  St. 
John's,  and  even  north  of  some  of  the  streams  which  flow  into  the  Bay  of 
Chiileurs.  Now  would  Great  Brilain,  famed  for  her  diplomatic  skill,  have 
let  such  an  opportunity  pass,  without  urging  her  claim  to  six  millions  of 
acres  of  territory,  if  she  had  believed,  for  a  moment,  that  she  had  any  such 
claim?  We  say,  she  would  not.  The  very  fact  that  nothing  was  con- 
sidered doubtful,  at  that  time,  but  the  true  St.  Croix,  shows  most  clearly 
that  she  acquiesced  in  our  claim.  But  this  is  not  all ;  her  agent  allowed, 
and  was  compelled  to  allow,  that  our  territory  extended  across  the  St.  John's, 
and  cut  off  some  of  the  streams  that  fell  into  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs. 

But  the  concessions  of  Great  Britain  do  not  stop  here.  In  the  corres- 
pondence carried  on  between  the  American  and' British  coiuniissioners 
during  the  pendency  of  the  treaty  of  Ghent,  in  1814,  this  question  of  boun 
dary  was  discussed.  But  the  British  commissioners  had  not  et  that  li:no 
the  boldness,  or  rather  effrontery,  to  pretend  that  tlie  northwest  angle  of 
Nova  Scotia  was  south  of  the  St.  John's.  The  British  commissioners  call 
the  attention  of  the  American  commissioners  to  ihc  subject  of  tiiis  l-ouii 
dary.  In  a  note  from  the  British  to  the  American  commissioners,  dated 
Ghent,  August  8,  1814,  they  make  certain  proposals  concerning  the  I'oun- 
dary  through  the  great  lakes,  and  then  say,  "If  this  can  be  adjusted,  tliere 
will  then  remain  for  discussion  the  arrangement  of  the  northwestern 
boundary,  between  Lake  Superior  and  the  Mississippi,  the  free  navigation  of 
that  river,  and  such  a  variation  of  the  line  of  frontier  as  may  secure  a 
direct  communication  between  Cluebec  arid  Halifax:^ 


direcl 
their 
venii 
ask  f< 


11 


[431] 


samo  nclvniitn:ro. 

west(3rn  or  niiiin 
his  ollect  to  tfio 
I  ill  Jill  iiLstniiccs 
es  impossible  bi/ 

not  only  of  the 
rets  af'the  Fe- 
c  must  of  itcces- 
f  it  almost  at  tiie  , 

/^///  if  a  north 
ot  onli/  cross  the  '. 
le  metropolis  of  | 

which  Jail  into 
into  t/ic  Gn/f  oj 
iilands  iiitcncled 
.  But  it  will  bo 
'er  was  assumed 
s  the  ^t.  John's. 
lortli  lino  would 
itiiiii  fifty  miles 

sources  of  the 
iits  to  a  positive 

near  the  forty- 
ot  oliject  to  tli'is 
at  fall  into  the 

that  it  extends 


:,  the  confession 
ih  Government 
tiorth  of  the  St. 
into  the  Bay  of 
iftlic  skill,  have 
six  millions  of 
3  had  any  snch 
hing  was  con- 
Lvs  most  clearly 
agent  allowed, 
s  the  St.  John's,  > 
alenrs. 

In  tho  rorrrs- 
coniinissioncrs 
estion  of  boun 
I'^f  f^t  that  li:no 
iwest  angle  of 
inissioners  call 

of  this  houii 
ssioners,  dated 
ling  tho  honn- 
idjusted,  there 

northwestern 

)  navigation  of 

may  sccnre  a 


Hero  we  discover  the  frne  secret  of  tho  British  claim.  They  want  a 
direct  communication  between  Unebcc,  the  capital  of  Canada,  and  Halifax, 
their  great  naval  depot  in  North  America.  They  found  onr  territory  inter- 
vening, and  instead  of  having  the  boldness  to  claim  it  as  their  own,  they 
ask  for  snch  a  vatiatioii  of  tlie  lino  as  will  give  them  that  commnnication. 

The  American  commissioners,  under  date  of  August  24,  say,  ''They 
have  no  authority  to  cede  any  part  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States  ; 
and  to  no  stipulation  to  that  effect  will  they  subscribe."  The  British  com- 
missioners, under  date  of  September  4,  say,  "The  undersigned  are  pur- 
suaded  that  an  arrangement  on  this  point  might  easily  be  made,  if  entered 
into  with  a  spirit  of  conciliation,  without  any  prejudice  to  the  ititerests  ot 
the  district  in  question."  The  American  commissioners  say,  in  reply,  under 
date  of  September  9,  "  They  have  no  authority  to  cede  any  part  of  the 
Slate  of  Massachusetts,  even'  for  what  the  British  Government  might  con- 
sider a  fair  equivalent.^''  The  British  commissioners,  in  a  note  of  October  8, 
say,  "  'Fho  British  Government  never  required  that  all  th?.t  portion  of  the 
State  of  Massachusetts  intervening  between  the  province  of  New  Bruns- 
wick and  Quebec  should  be  ceded  to  Great  Britain  ;  but  only  that  small 
portion  of  unsettled  country  which  interrupts  the  comminiicalion  between 
Quebec  and  Halifax,  there  being  much  doubt  whether  it  does  not  already 
belong  to  Great  Britain." 

This  correspondence  was  held  in  the  summer  and  autumn  of  1814,  and 
it  shows  the  feelings  of  the  parties  at  that  time.  The  Government  of  Great 
Britain  did  not,  at  that  period,  assert  any  claim  to  our  territory  ;  she  avow- 
ed her  object,  viz :  to  have  a  direct  communication  between  Quebec  and 
Halifax.  'J'his  is  a  direct  confession  that  our  territory  extends  so  far 
north  as  to  interrupt  that  communication  ;  and  hence  they  ask  for  a  varia- 
tion of  the  line,  or  a  cession  of  so  much  of  our  territory  as  will  give  them 
that  communication.  And  to  make  the  request  a  little  palatable,  they  af- 
firm that  they  do  not  require  a  cession  of  all  the  territory  that  intervenes 
between  the  places  mentioned,  but  only  a  sm(dl  portion  of  unsettled  comi- 
iry.  Now,  if  concessions  amount  to  anything,  we  have  an  admission 
which  must  be  decisive  in  the  case,  that  the  present  demand  of  Great 
Britain  is  an  after  thought,  and  is  consequently  unjust.  The  whole  course 
of  this  correspondence  goes  on  the  ground  that  the  territory  in  question  is 
ours  by  the  treaty.  Great  Britain  does  not  claim  it  as  a  right ;  she  states 
its  importance  to  her,  asks  for  a  variation  of  line,  or  a  cession  of  territory, 
and  intimates  that  an  equivalent  will  cheerfully  be  given,  if  she  can  be  ac- 
commodated in  this  respect.  Another  concession  of  Great  Britain  may  be 
drawn  from  our  undisturbed  possession  of  this  territory.  The  Madawaska 
settlement,  situated  on  the  St.  John's,  was  included  in  the  census  f  the 
United  States  in  1820. 

Nor  is  this  the  only  evidence  that  this  settlement  on  the  St.  John's  right- 
fully belongs  to  the  United  States;  Under  a  grant  of  the  Commonwealth 
to  Jackson  and  Flynf,  of  which  we  sliall  speak  hereafter,  Park  Holland,  an 
approved  surveyor,  was  employed  in  1794  to  run  the  line.  In  his  field 
book,  now  in  the  office  of  the  land  agent  of  the  Commonwealth,  he 
speaks  thus  of  this  settlement:  "It  may  riot  be  improper  in  this  place  to 
give  some  description  of  the  village  of  Madawoska.  as  it  lies  within  the  lim- 
its of  this  Commonwealth.  As  you  go  down  the  river  St.  John  from  tho 
east  line  we  run  to  (Janada,  about  ten  miles,  you  come  to  the  village.  It  is 
situated  a  little  below  the  mouth  of  the  river  of  the  same  name.    It  consists 


[431  J 


13 


of  nboiil  fifty  or  sixty  fiitnilies  of  Fioiicli,  or,  as  they  call  thomselves,  Aca- 
dians,  and  were  formerly  known  by  the  name  of  Neutral  P>ench.  These 
people  wore  drove  from  St.  Ann's  by  tlio  British,  seven  or  eijfht  years  n^^o  ; 
and  they  with  their  small  effects  proceeded  np  the  river  and  founded  a  settle- 
ment in  this  place,"'  &-c. 

The  survey  being  uiade  in  1791,  when  there  was  no  controversy  relative 
to  this  northern  boundary,  is  f^ood  evidence  in  the  case.  It  shows  the  un- 
derstanding of  the  parties  at  the  time,  and  so  furnishes  a  strong  argument, 
drawn  from  contemporaneous  construction. 

The  liCgislature  of  Massachusetts  granted  a  half  township  of  land  to 
Deertield  Acadamy  in  1797,  and  another  half  township  the  same  year  to 
Westfield  Academy.  Both  of  these  grants  lay  to  the  north  and  west  of 
Mfirs  Hill,  and  so  fall  within  the  territory  now  claimed  by  Great  Britain. 
In  later  periods,  Massachusetts  has  made  grants  of  land  still  further  north. 
In  1806  a  half  township  was  granted  to  General  Eaton,  and  in  1808  a 
township  was  granted  to  the  town  of  Plymouth.  The  two  last  mentioned 
grants  are  located  on  the  Aroostook  river,  some  eighteen  miles  north  of  tfie 
line  now  contended  for  by  Great  Britain.  There  is  another  case  still  more 
in  point.  On  the  18th  of  April,  1792,  Henry  Jackson  and  Royal  Flynt 
contracted  with  aconnnittee  of  Massachusetts  for  the  sale  of  eastern  lands, 
for  the  purchase  of  all  the  lands  belonging  to  the  Commonwealth  within 
the  following  boinids,  viz :  ••  westerly  by  a  line  on  the  east  side  of  the  Pe- 
nobscot river  at  the  distance  of  six  miles  therefrom  ;  easterly  by  the  river 
Schoodic,  Jind  a  line  extending  northerly  to  the  hi^ldands,  or  by  the  line 
of  demarkatjon,  described  in  the  treaty  of  peace  between  the  United  States 
and  Great  Britain,  as  relative  to  Lower  Canada  and  the  District  of  Maine," 
The  contracting  parties,  not  knowing  the  direction  of  the  Penobscot,  acted 
under  the  impression  that  the  whole  of  said  tract  of  country  would  em- 
brace from  one  million  to  twelve  or  fifteen  hundred  thousand  acres.  Jack- 
son and  Flynt  paid  the  sum  of  five  thousand  dollars  in  money,  and  obligat- 
ed themselves  to  pay  the  residue  in  time  as  agrefd  upon. 

In  the  year  1794,  Park  Holland  and  Jonathan  Maynard,  the  surveyors 
appointed  by  the  Laud  Committee,  to  survey  the  land  above  described,  com  • , 
pleied  their  survey,  and  returned  a  plan  and  field  books,  which  are  now 
in  the  office  of  the  land  agent  of  this  Commonwealth.  By  the  survey,  it 
appeared  that,  instead  of  twelve  or  fifteen  hundred  thousand  acres,  the  ter- 
ritory in  question  embraced  two  million  nine  hundred  thousand  acres; 
which,  with  lands  previously  bought  by  said  Jackson  and  Flynt,  would  be 
nearly  equal  to  five  millions  of  acres.  Finding  themselves  unable  to  meet 
their  engagements,  and  a  suit  being  instituted  against  them,  they  petitioned 
the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  to  be  released  from  the  contract,  which 
was  accordingly  done. 

The  eastern  line  of  this  grant  commenced  at  a  point  about  ten  miles 
south  and  west  of  the  monument  at  the  source  of  the  St.  Croix,  and  run 
north  by  the  compass  one  hundred  and  fifty-two  miles,  passing  the  Aroos- 
took and  the  St.  John's,  and  terminating  at  the  highlands  about  fourteen 
miles  north  of  the  last  mentioned  river.  Mr.  Holland,  in  his  field  book 
of  this  survey,  says:  "We  find  it  something  difficult  to  determine  thehHght 
that  divides  the  waters  of  the  St,  Lawrence  from  those  of  the  St,  John's ; 
for  the  streams  on  these  mountains  are  small,  and  rtin  in  different  direc- 
tions, according  to  the  windings  of  the  mouUvdins  they  run  between.  But 
every  circumstance  considered,  we  think  best  to  mark  our  bound  at  the  153d 


mile  n] 
moiuitl 
and  ri( 
watert 
Thil 
Osgooj 
made 
it  appr 
was  01 
Croixj 
gardetl 
of  a  U 


13 


[431] 


homselves,  Aca- 
Fronch.     These    j 
eight  years  ntjo  ;    ' 
founded  jv  settle- 

troversy  relntive    ) 
It  shown  the  un- 
Irong  argument, 

ship  of  land  to 
he  same  year  to 
rth  and  west  of 
Great  Britain. 
ill  further  north, 
and  in  1808  a 
)  last  mentioned 
les  north  of  the 
r  case  still  more 
d  Royal  Flynt 
f  eastern  lands, 
nweallh  within 
side  of  the  Pe- 
ly  by  the  river 
or  by  the  line 
le  United  States 
ilrict  of  Maine." 
'enobscot,  acted 
■ry  would  om- 
d  acres.    Jack- 
ie, and  obligat- 


the  surveyors 
Jescribed,  com  • . 
i^hich  are  now 
the  survey,  it 

acres,  the  ter- 
lusand  acres; 
lynt,  would  be 
mable  to  meet 
hey  petitioned 
•ntract,  which 

>ut  ten  njiles 
oix,  and  run 
ig  the  Aroos- 
'out  Iburteen 
lis  field  book 
ine  the  h?ight 
10  St.  John's ; 
ifferent  direc- 
stween.  But 
id  at  the  153d 


mile  mark.  The  land  in  general  from  the  St.  John's  to  this  corner  is 
monntainous,  but  the  mountains  in  general  are  free  from  rock  or  ledges, 
and  rise  gently,  and  are  covered  with  Imrd  wood,  and  a  good  soil,  and  well 
watered  with  springs  and  small  brooks." 

This  survey  is  laid  down  on  the  map  of  the  District  of  Maine,  drawn  by 
Osgood  Carleton  1795,  and  published  to  tins  world.  This  survey  was 
made  in  a  public  manner,  and  laid  down  u])oii  the  map  of  Maine,  and,  as 
it  approached  with  eight  or  ten  miles  of  the  territory  of  New  Brunswick,  and 
was  only  a  year  or  two  prior  to  the  convention  which  settled  the  true  St. 
Croix,  it  must  have  been  known  to  Great  Britain  that  Massachusetts  re- 
garded the  land  as  her  own,  and  had  covenanted  to  give  a  warrantee  deed 
of  a  lar^e  portion  of  the  territory  which  she  now  claims.  In  fact,  a  line 
drawn  from  the  western  head  of  the  St.  Croix,  a  line  for  which  the  British 
commissioners  then  contended,  would  include  a  part  of  this  very  territory. 
But  Great  Britain  withdrew  herclaini,  and  thereby  acknowledged  that  the 
territory  was  rightlully  ours,  according  to  the  terms  of  the  treaty. 

Now  can  any  person  believe  that  Great  Britain,  ever  watchful  of  her 
own  interest,  ever  skilAil  in  all  the  arts  of  diplomacy,  would  sufi'er  Massa- 
chusetts to  take  possession  of  nearly  two  millions  of  her  territory  without 
even  interposing  an  objection  1  Does  this  accord  with  her  general  charac- 
ter/ Has  she  been  disposed  to  yield  her  jurisdiction,  give  up  her  lawful 
possessions,  and  submit  to  an  acknowledged  inconvenience,  when  she  was 
conscious  that  justice  and  equity  were  entirely  upon  her  side?  Now  she  is 
so  jealous  of  her  rights,  that  she  has  seized  and  imprisoned  the  citizens  of 
an  independent  State  and  nation,  only  because  they  came  upon  the  dis- 
puted territory,  to  take  a  census  of  a  small  village.  Now,  if  an  individual 
enters  upon  this  territory,  and  does  anything  which  seems  to  imply  that  it 
rightfully  belongs  to  the  United  States,  the  voice  of  remonstrance  is  at  once 
heard,  and  the  person  so  entering  is  threatened  with  a  severe  punishment. 

And  would  a  nation,  thus  jealous  of  her  rights,  have  permitted  the  State 
of  Massachusetts  to  dispose  of  this  very  territory  by  townships,  and  much 
larger  grants,  if  she  had  had  the  least  suspicion  that  it  belonged  to  her 
rightfully,  by  treaty  ?  We  cannot  conceive  of  a  clearer  case.  This  whole- 
sale grant,  by  our  own  Commonwealth,  shows  that  Massachusetts  had  no 
suspicion  but  that  the  territory  was  within  her  jurisdiction.  The  act  of 
surveying  and  taking  public  possession  in  the  very  presence,  and  under  the 
eye  of  the  British  authorities,  and  that  without  any  remonstrance  on  their 
part,  proves  beyond  controversy  that  those  who  made  the  treaty  knew  full 
well  that  thi?  territory  in  question  fell  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States. 
Let  Massachusetts  or  Maine  make  such  a  grant  at  the  present  day,  and  the 
voice  of  remonstrance  would  at  once  be  heard.  Though  the  teri^itory  is 
not  hers,  yet  so  long  as  there  is  any  claim  to  it  on  her  part,  so  long  as  the 
question  is  no  open  one,  Great  Britain  considers  that  she  is  prompted  both 
by  interest  and  by  honor  to  interpose  her  objections  to  any  act  on  our  part 
which  could  in  the  slightest  degree  be  construed  into  an  admission  that  this 
territory  rightfully  belongs  to  the  United  States.  But  why  this  vigilance 
at  the  present  day  ?  Has  she  become  more  watchful  over  her  colonies  than 
she  was  formerly?  The  fact  is,  for  the  first  thirty  years  after  the  treaty  of 
peace,  she  did  not  even  dream  that  this  territory  fell  within  her  dominions ; 
but  of  late,  encouraged  by  the  indifference  of  our  own  Government,  she  has 
asserted  her  claim,  and  she  finds  that  the  United  States  are  disposed  to  re- 
cede with  the  same  pace  with  which  she  advances. 


I 


[.i:]i  ] 


M 


!' 


1 


Now  with  iill  tlii\s(!  fiicts  and  these  concessions  dm  (he  piirt  of  Grc:\t 
Uritain  hclonj  us,  we  can  conceive  of  neilht-r  propiii.-ty  nor  justice  in  her 
cliiiuj  to  the  territory  in  «|ue.stion.  In  the  iroiity  of  178:J,  she  only  atlirnicd 
an  old  tioinidary,  which  had  hecn  lon;r  cstahli^hod,  ami  often  rccosrnised 
by  evt;ry  departnient  of  her  Governtnent, — a  houndary  laid  down  upon  all 
the  maps  at  that  period,  and  one  which  has  heen  constantly  recoafinseil 
IronUiio  signin<jf  of  the  treaty  till  1820,  a  period  of  nearly  forty  years!. 
During  this  period  she  saw  us  in  possession  of  this  very  territory,  disposinjf 
of  it  by  townships,  and  even  in  tracts  of  millions  of  acres,  without  even  in- 
timating that  we  were  ehcroachinjr  upon  lier  possessions.  In  1797,  whei; 
tlie  subject  of  the  boundaries  was  brought  directly  before  her  Government, 
she  acknowledged  by  her  agent  that  our  territory  must  nfntcessUy  extend 
north  of  the  St.  John's,  and  that  this  stream  should  be  regarded  as  an  At- 
huitic  river.  In  1814,  when  the  very  question  now  before  ns  was  bronglit 
distinctly  into  view,  her  commissioners  humbly  asked  for  a  varialion  of 
the  line,  or  a  cession  of  a  small  part  of  our  tirritory,  so  that  she  might 
liave  a  direct  communication  between  Halifax  and  Uuebec, — thereby  ad- 
mitting that  the  territory  was  rightfully  ours. 

Your  committee  can  hardly  conceive  of  a  stronger  claim  or  a  better  title 
than  the  United  States  have  to  the  disputed  territory.  We  cannot  express 
our  convictions  belter  than  by  adopting  the  strong  language  of  the  present 
chief  magistrate  of  Maine.  "  If,"  says  he,  "  there  is  any  meaning  in  plain 
language,  and  any  binding  force  in  treaty  engagements,'  if  recognition  and 
acquiescence  for  a  long  series  of  years  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain  in  one 
uniform  expression  and  construction  of  the  boundaries  of  her  provinces  of 
Canada  and  Nova  Scotia,  is  of  any  weight,  then  the  right  of  Maine  to  the 
territory  in  dispute  is  as  clear  and  unquestionable  as  to  the  spot  on  which 
we  now  stand.  It  requires  indeed  the  exercise  of  charity  to  reconcile  the 
claim  nov  made  by  Great  Britain  with  her  professions  of  strict  integrity 
and  high  sense  of  justice  in  her  dealings  with  other  nations  ;  for  it  is  a 
claim  of  very  recent  origin,  growing  from  an  admitted  right  in  us,  and  pro- 
ceeding first  to  a  request  to  vary  our  acknowledged  line  for  an  equivalent, 
and  then,  upon  a  denial,  to  a  wavering  doubt,  and  from  thence  to  an  abso- 
lute claim. 

"  It  has  required  and  still  requires  all  the  talents  of  her  statesmen,  and 
skill  of  her  diplomatists,  to  render  that  obscure  and  indefinite  which  is 
clear  and  unambiguous.  I  cannot,  for  a  moment,  doubt,  that  if  the  same 
question  should  arise'in  private  life,  in  relation  to  the  boundary  of  two  ad- 
jacent farms,  with  the  same  evidence  and  the  same  arguments,  it  would  be 
decided  by  any  court  in  any  civilized  country  without  hesitation  or  doubt, 
according  to  our  claim." 

We  speak  with  confidence  on  this  subject,  because  we  feel  a  conscious- 
ness that  we  are  borne  out  by  the  facts  in  the  case.  We  are  satisfied  that 
any  man  of  ordinary  capacity,  who  will  examine  the  subject  free  from  bias, 
will  come  to  the  same  result.  We  believe  that  no  jury  in  the  land,  no 
judicial  tribunal  in  any  civilized  country,  could,  acting  under  the  respon- 
sibility of  an  oath,  give  verdict  or  sentence  against  us.  Our  claim  is  so 
clear  and  indisputable,  that  our  only  surprise  is,  that  any  nation,  making 
any  pretensions  to  magnanimity,  or  even  to  justice,  should  for  a  moment 
call  it  in  question.  The  language  of  the  treaty  is  so  clear,  that  no  argu- 
ment can  make  it  more  definite.    In  fact, 

" —  The  boundary  is  so  plain, 
That  to  mistake  it,  costs  the  time  and  pain." 


We 

jWaiits  a 
iwas  avo 
lint  that 
tory,  or 
':held  by 
itiuj  lact 
erected, 
survey 
,cordin<; 
'  uient,  it 
,  cision  t 
It  wi 
was  or 
!  it  only 
i  fifth  art 
recital : 
"  Wi 
source 
'■  as  the  I 
tlie  (Ji)i 
the  bou 
'  from  th 
!  northw 
divide 
those  \\ 
agreed, 
By  tl 
■  parties 
I  treaty ; 
'  metes  i 
provide 
article 
termiu' 
the  sai 
The 
ning  tl 
ments. 
Britisli 
menli( 
Great 
howe^ 
evidei 
Yo 
Britai 
conve 
crectf 
tweer 
due  r 
Mars 
ment, 
the  SI 


11 


IS 


r  431 1 


3  juirt  of  (iiv.'it 
>r  jiisiicij  ill  her 
10  only  adirincd 
rteii   rcL'osriiist'd 
down  upon  ull 
iitly  recognisctl 
riy  forty  ^yenrs. 
itory,  disposing 
without  even  iij- 
In  1797,  when 
5r  Government, 
uessiiy  extend 
arcled  ns  an  At- 
iis  WHS  brought 
'  n  variation  of 
that  she  niiglit 
C!, — thereby  ad- 

or  a  better  title 
cuiniot  express 
of  the  present 
3anin^  in  plain 
ecognition  and 
Britain  in  one 
r  provinces  of 
■  Maine  to  the 
spot  on  which 

0  reconcile  the 
strict  integrity 
HIS  ;  for  it  is  a 
in  us,  and  pro- 
an  equivalent, 
ice  to  an  abso- 

itatesmen,  and 
nite  which  is 
at  if  the  same 
iry  of  two  ad- 
;s,  it  would  be 
tion  or  doubt, 

1  a  conscious- 
satisfied  that 

free  from  bias, 
the  land,  no 
sr  the  respon- 
ir  claim  is  so 
ition,  making 
for  a  moment 
that  no  arffu- 


AVo  have  already  seen  the  object  which  Great  f?rit.'iin  has  in  view — she 
wants  a  diroct  lanil  connnnnicution  bi'twecn  Halifax  iiiid  Uucbtc.  This 
was  avowid  in  the  negotiation  during  the  pendency  of  the  Ghent  treaty. 
Hut  thill  treaty  was  concluded  in  1S14 — 15,  witliont  any  cession  of  ti-rri- 
tory,  or  any  concession  on  our  part  that  the  territory  now  in  dispute  was 
'jheld  by  us  l>y  any  doubtful  tenure.  The  fifth  article  of  that  treaty  recited 
the  fact  that  the  line  had  never  been  accurately  run,  and  the  monuments 
erected,  and  then  provided  that  two  commissioners  should  be  appointed  to 
survey  the  country  and  mark  the  dividing  lino  by  metes  and  bounds,  ac- 
cordini;  to  the  provisions  of  the  treaty  of  1783 ;  and  in  case  of  disagree- 
'  nient,  it  was  provided  that  the  wliole  subject  should  be  referred  for  de- 
cision to  some  friendly  power. 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  treaty  does  not  admit,  for  a  moment,  that  there 
;  was  or  could  be  any  doubt  respecting  the  meaning  of  the  treaty  of  1783 ; 
'  it  only  provides  for  the  running  of  the  line  agreeable  to  that  treaty.  The 
\  fifth  article,  which  provides  for  these  commissioners,  commences  with  this 

recital : 

j      "  Whereas,  neither  that  point  of  the. highlands  lying  due  north  from  the 

^  source  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  and  designated  in  the  former  treaty  of  peace 

lis  the  northwest  angle  of  JSova  Scotia,  nor  the  northwesternmost  head  of 

the  Uonnccticut  river,  has  yet  been  ascertained ;  and  whereas,  that  part  of 

the  boiuidary  line  between  the  dominions  of  the  two  powers,  which  extends 

from  the  source  of  the  river  St.  Croix  directly  north  to  the  abovementioned 

1  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  and  thence  along  the  said  highlands  which 

divide  those  rivers  that  empty  themselves  into  the  river  St.  tawrence  from 

those  which  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean,  has  not  been  surveyed;  it  is 

agreed,"  &,c. 

By  this  recital,  it  will  be  at  once  perceived  that  the  high  contracting 
parties  do  not  admit  that  there  is  any  uncertainty  in  the  meaning  of  tiie 
treaty  ;  they  only  assert  that  the  lino  has  not  been  surveyed,  and  the  exact 
metes  and  bounds  recorded ;  and  to  effect  this  object,  they  appoint  or  rather 
provide  for  the  appointment  of  two  commissioners.  The  language  of  the 
article  is  :  »  The  said  commissioners  shall  have  power  to  ascertain  and  de- 
termine the  points  above  mentioned,  in  conformity  with  the  provisions  of 
the  said  treaty  of  peace  of  1783." 

The  commissioners  appointed  under  f 'lis  treaty  met  and  commenced  run- 
ning the  line  in  1817,  and  in  1822  made  separate  reports  to  the  two  Govern- 
ments. It  was  during  th(#e  surveys  and  examinations  that  Mr.  Odell,  the 
British  sur'^eyor,  first  started  the  pretence  that  Mars  Hill  was  the  highlands 
mentioned  in  the  treaty  of  1783  ;  and  from  tliat  period  to  the  present  time 
Great  Britain  has  been  urging  her  claim  in  a  bolder  and  bolder  tone ;  more, 
however,  from  the  concessions  of  our  own  Government,  than  from  any  new 
evidence  on  her  part  in  support  of  her  pretensions. 

Your  committee  now  propose  to  state  the  positions  assumed  by  Great 
Britain,  and  to  examine  the  arguments  she  alleges  in  their  support.  The 
convention  of  1797  settled  the  question  concerning  the  true  St.  Croix,  and 
erected  a  monument  at  its  source.  Thus  far  there  is  no  controversy  be- 
tween the  two  Governments.  Great  Britain  allows  that  the  line  must  run 
due  north  from  this  monument  to  the  highlands.  But  she  maintains  that 
Mars  Hill,  a  small  isolated  mountain,  about  forty  miles  riorth  of  this  monu- 
ment, is  the  range  of  highlands  mentioned  in  the  treaty.  By  recurring  to 
the  subjoined  map  A,  it  will  be  seen  that  Mars  Hill  is  situated  between  the 


[431  1 


16 


Penobscot  and  the  St.  John's,  and  is  about  one  hundred  miles  sont!i  of  the 
highlands  for  which  we  contend,  the  highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  that 
flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  that  fall  into  the  sea.  The  liighlands 
for  which  we  contend,  and  those  contended  for  by  (ireat  Britain,  are  both 
laid  down  on  the  map,  and  are  both  due  north  from  the  source  of  the  St. 
Croix. 

But  which  are  the  highlands  contemplated  in  the  treaty?  Whatever 
disputes  may  arise,  one  thing  is  certain.  Wherever  these  highlands  are 
situated,  they  must  divide  the  rivers  whicli  empty  themselves  into  the  St. 
Lawrence  from  those  that  fall  into  the  sea  or  Atlantic  ocean.  The 
treaty  does  not  bound  us  north  by  the  highlands  simply,  but  by  highlands 
which  are  therein  described ;  highlands  which  perform  a  certain  office, 
"  which  divide  the  rivers  which  empty  themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence 
from  those  that  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean." 

Now  apply  this  definition  of  the  highlands  to  Mars  Hill  and  the  isolated 
elevations  which  are  situated  to  the  west  cf  it.  Do  they  divide  the  waters 
which  flow  into  the  St.  liawrence  from  those  that  fidl  into  the  Atlantic? 
They  do  not ;  they  divide  the  waters  of  the  St.  John's  from  the  waters  of 
the  Penobscot;  both  of  which  are  Atlantic  rivers.  These  pretended  high- 
lands do  not  answer  the  description  of  the  treaty  ;  for,  instead  of  dividing 
the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence  frorii  those  that  fall  into  the 
Atlantic,  they  have  no  connexion  whatever  with  the  rivers  that  empty 
themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence  in  a  direction  north  from  the  monument : 
they,  in  fact,  divide  the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  Atlantic  from  those  that 
flow  into  the  Atlantic  !  and  so  cannot  be  the  highlands  mentioned  in  the 
treaty. 

Nor  is  this  all :  By  the  very  terms  of  the  treaty  that  portion  of  the  high- 
lands intersected  by  the  line  due  north  from  the  source  of  the  St.  Croix 
must  be  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia.  And  where  is  that  situated, 
or  how  is  that  angle  formed?  By  recurrence  to  all  the  ancient  documents, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  southern  boundary  of  Quebec  and  the  northern 
boundary  of  Nova  Scotia  coincide,  and  that  they  run  "along  the  highhmds 
which  divide  the  rivers  that  empty  themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from 
those  which  fall  into  the  sea,  and  also  along  the  north  coast  of  the  Bay  des 
Chaleurs,  and  the  coast  of  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence." 

By  recurring  to  Mitchell's  map,  which  is  allowed  to  have  governed  the 
commissioners  of  both  nations  when  they  signed  the  treaty  of  1783,  and 
which  is  herewith  subjoined,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  is 
situated  north  of  the  forty-fifth  degree  of  north  latitude.  This  southern 
boundary  of  Quebec,  or  northern  boundary  of  Nova  Scotia,  must  pass  to 
the  north  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  which,  according  to  the  map  which  was 
before  the  commissioners,  must  be  thirty-five  or  forty  miles  north  of  the 
forty-eighth  degree  of  north  latitude.  These  highlands  are  delineated  on 
Mitchell's  map,  and  they  show,  most  conclusively,  that  the  line  contem- 
plated by  the  treaty  of  1783  could  not  approach  within  a  hundred  miles  of 
Mars  Hill ;  nor  is  there  any  such  mountain  as  Mars  Hill,  or,  in  fact,  any 
other  mountain  south  of  the  St.  John's,  laid  down  upon  that  map,  which 
could  be  intersected  by  a  north  line  from  the  source  of  the  St.  Croix.  How 
then  can  they  pretend  that  Mars  Hill  is  the  highlands  contemplated,  when 
there  is  no  such  mountain  laid  down  upon  the  map  recognised  as  the  true 
topography  of  the  country  as  it  was  then  understood  ? 

The  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia  is  formed  by  a  line  north  from  the 


I    monu 
Bay  0 

the  St 
in  the 
highlf 
be  nee 
I  Cover 
I    spokei 


-•««■ 


17 


[431] 


iles  south  of  the 
de  the  rivers  tliat 
The  highlands 
Britain,  are  botli 
iource  of  the  St. 

aty?    Whatever 

highlands  are  I 

ves  info  the  St.  '] 

ic  ocean.    The  ! 

lit  by  highlands  i 

certain  office,  | 

e  St.  Lawrence  \ 

i 

and  the  isolated  | 
ivide  the  waters  ? 
to  the  Atlantic?  I 
m  the  waters  of  S 
pretended  high-  ^ 
ead  of  dividing  ' 
at  fall  into  the 
ers  that  empty 
he  monument : 
from  those  that 
jntioned  in  the 


on  of  the  high- 
;f  the  St.  Croix 
is  that  situated, 
mt  documents, 
1  the  northerri 
:  the  highlands 
-iiiwrcnce  from 
of  the  Bay  des 

1  governed  the 
y  of  1783,  and 
>f  Chaleurs  is 
rhis  southern 
,  must  pass  to 
ap  which  was 

north  of  the 
delineated  on 

line  contem- 
dred  miles  of 
',  in  fact,  any 
t  map,  which 
Croix.  How^ 
iplated,  when 
;d  as  the  true 

)rlh  from  the 


monument,  intersecting  a  line  running  westerly  from  the  north  coast  of  the 
Bay  of  Chaleurs,  along  the  highlands  in  which  the  streams  that  flow  into 
the  St.  Lawrence  have  their  source.  This  forms  the  angle  as  contemplated 
in  the  treaty,  and  it  must  be  nearly  a  right  angle.  The  line  along  the 
highlands,  where  it  is  intersected  by  the  meridian  of  the  monument,  must 
be  nearly  east  and  west,  to  answer  the  description  given  of  it  by  the  British 
Government  themselves.  Whenever  the  southern  boundary  of  Quebec  is 
spoken  of  by  that  Government,  it  is  declared  to  be  a  line  from  the  north 
coast  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  along  the  highlands.  Now,  it  is  manifest  that 
if  this  line  bounds  the  province  of  duebec,  or  Lower  Canada,  as  it  is  now 
called,  on  the  south,  this  southern  boundary  line  must  run  easterly  and 
westerly.  The  same  remark  will  apply  to  the  northern  boundary  of  Nova 
Scotia.  That  is  always  described,  as  we  have  already  seen,  as  the  southern 
boundary  of  the  province  of  Quebec,  or  on  the  north  by  said  boundary  as 
far  as  the  western  extremity  of  the  Bay  of  Ciialeurs. 

But  let  us  for  a  moment  see  how  this  description  of  boundary  will  apply 
to  the  line  contended  for  by  Great  Britain.  She  makes^Mars  Hill  the  north- 
west angle  of  Nova  Scotia.  Now,  a  line  drawn  from  Mars  Hill  to  the 
western  extremity  of  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  so  as  to  pass  to  the  north  side  of  it 
without  crossing  it,  must  be  nearly  north  and  south ;  and,  instead  of  being 
along  the  highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence 
from  those  that  fall  into  the  sea,  or  Atlantic  ocean,  it  would  have  no  pos- 
sible relation  to  the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence,  and  would  run 
directly  across  the  St.  John's,  a  river  that  empties  into  the  Atlantic  ocean. 
And  would  this  answer  the  description  given  by  the  Crown  and  Parliament 
of  the  northern  boundary  of  Nova  Scotia?  No ;  but  it  would  contradict 
that  description  in  every  particular.  Instead  of  being  easterly,  it  would  be 
northerly ;  instead  of  that  province  being  bounded  westerly  by  a  line  duo 
north  from  the  source  of  the  St.  Croix,  three-fourths  of  its  western  boundary 
would  be  a  line  drawn  from  Mars  Hill,  the  British  highlands,  to  the  Bay  of 
Chaleurs ;  and,  instead  of  this  line  running  easterly  along  the  highlands 
which  divide  the  rivers  that  fall  irao  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  that  flow 
into  the  Atlantic,  it  would  extend  northerly  along  lowlands  and  across  the 
river  that  flows  into  the  Atlantic,  and  leave  the  other  class  of  rivers  entirely 
out  of  the  question.  We  can  hardly  conceive  of  a  more  palpable  violation 
of  the  language  of  the  British  Government,  or  of  the  treaty.  Nor  is  this 
the  only  contradiction  with  which  their  pretensions  are  embarrassed.  If 
Mars  Hill  is  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  then  Nova  Scotia  has  two 
northwest  angles.  All  the  descriptions  of  her  boundary  allow  that  her 
north  boundary  extends  to  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs.  Now,  if  you  make  Mars 
Hill  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  and  continue  a  line  from  thence, 
as  you  must,  to  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  you  will  have  another  northwest  angle 
at  that  point.  But  the  treaty  contemplates  but  one  northwest  angle.  The 
language  employed  in  the  treaty  is,  "from  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova 
Scotia."  The  definite  article  the,  as  it  is  here  used,  plainly  pomts  out  one 
angle,  and  one  only.  But  in  direct  opposition  to  this,  Great  Britain  gravely 
contends  for  two  northwest  angles  !  But,  after  all,  what  sort  of  an  angle  is 
made  by  a  line  running  from  Mars  Hill  to  the  western  extremity  of  the  Bay 
of  Chaleurs  ?  It  would  be  almost  a  straight  line  from  the  source  of  the  St. 
Croix  to  Mars  Hill,  and  thence  to  the  western  extremity  of  the  above  named 
bay ;  and  your  committee  have  not  geometrical  acuteness  enough  to  find 
an  angle  on  a  straight  line. 
8 


H 


[431] 


18 


V     i 


But  the  whole  plea  is  preposterous.  The  map  which  is  acknowledged 
to  have  governed  the  parties  at  their  public  conferences  lias  no  mountain 
delineated  from  Mars  Hill  to  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs,  nor  is  Mars  Hill  itself 
there  laid  down.  The  claim  now  put  forth  by  Great  Britain  is  not  only 
absurd  in  itself,  and  opposed  to  the  language  of  the  treaty,  but  is  in  direct 
opposition  to  her  own  acknowledgments  and  confessions.  The  British 
agent  employed  to  settle  the  question  as  to  the  true  St.  Croix,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  declared  that  the  line  must  of  necessity  cross  the  St.  John^s. 
He  also  contends  that  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia  is  located  at  the 
very  place  for  which  we  contend.  "  Can  any  man  hesitate  to  say,"  he 
asks,  "that  he  is  convinced  that  the  commissioners  at  Paris,  in  1783,  in 
forming  the  second  article  of  the  treaty  of  peace,  in  which  they  have  so 
exactly  described  this  northwest  angle,  had  reference  and  were  governed 
by  the  boundaries  of  Nova  Scotia,  as  described  in  the  grant  to  Sir  William 
Alexander,  and  the  subsequent  alteration  in  the  northern  boundary,  by  the 
creation  of  the  province  of  Quebec." 

It  is  objected  to  otir  claim,  that  a  line  due  north  from  the  source  of  the 
St.  Croix  intersects  no  mountain  north  of  the  St.  John's.  This  objection 
is  founded  on  the  assumption  that  the  highlands  mentioned  in  the  treaty 
must,  of  necessity,  be  mountains.  But  this  is  not  the  case.  The  word 
mountain  is  not  used  in  the  treaty,  nor  in  any  of  the  numer(»us  documents 
which  describe  the  same  boundary.  They  uniformly  use  the  word  high- 
landSf  and  this  term  is  invariably  defined  to  be  those  highlands  which 
dividj  the  rivers  which  run  in  difterent  directions.  The  term  denotes 
simply  the  height  of  land  or  summit,  where  streams  of  water  take  their 
rise  ;  and  it  may  be  more  or  less  elevated.  When  any  tract  of  country  is 
spoken  of,  as  the  height  ot  land  which  divides  the  streams,  it  by  no  means 
follows  that  this  must  be  a  mountain  of  great  elevation.  The  very  fact 
that  any  land  sends  its  streams  in  different  directions,  shovvs  that  it  is  the 
summit  or  height  of  land. 

Now  apply  this  to  the  tract  in  question.  It  will  be  seen  by  the  map  A, 
which  is  allowed  by  the  British  Government  to  be  a  just  delineation  of  the 
topography  of  the  country,  that  the  north  line,  as  claimed  by  the  United 
States,  terminates  at  a  point  situated  between  the  head  waters  of  the  Metis, 
a  stream  which  flows  into  the  St.  Lawrence,  and  one  of  the  branches  of  the 
Ristigouche.  The  very  fact  that  the  streams  run  in  different  directions 
from  this  point  proves  that  the  land  is  somewhat  elevated,  and  this  an- 
swers the  description  of  the  treaty.  From  this  point  of  intersection  to  the 
westward,  there  is  an  elevation  of  land  sufficient  to  divide  the  waters.  We 
care  not  whether  these  lands  are  more  or  less  elevated,  whether  they  are 
high  table  lands  or  abrupt  acclivities,  they  answer  equally  the  description 
given  in  the  treaty  of  1783.  The  course  of  the  rivers  as  laid  down  upon 
map  A  leads  us  naturally  to  the  belief  that  the  highlands,  where  they  are 
intersected  by  the  north  line  from  the  monument,  are  less  elevated  than 
this  ridge  is,  as  it  proceeds  westward.  Mr.  Partridge,  the  United  States 
surveyor,  has  given  us  the  elevation  of  several  of  the  mountains,  by  which 
it  appears  that  the  highest  point  of  the  highlands  by  him  surveyed  is  about 
500  feet  higher  than  the  highest  summit  of  Mars  Hill. 

The  highest  summit  of  Mars  Hill  has  been  ascertained  to  be  1,500  feet 
above  the  river  St.  John's.  About  60  miles  north  of  Mars  Hill,  the  north 
line,  after  having  crossed  the  St.  John's,  reaches  the  highlands  which  divide 
the  waters  of  that  river  from  those  of  the  Ristigouche.    Mr.  Johnson,  the 


Amcri 
is  cvi(| 
to  thai 
verticl 
St.  Jol 
or  mo 
Tl 
Noval 
slightj 
clearlj 
point  I 


I 


h  is  acknowledged 
s  has  no  mountain 

is  Mars  HiJl  itself 
Britain  is  not  only 
ty,  but  is  in  direct 
Pns.    The  British 

'roix,  as  we  have 
'•?*  the  Si.  John's. 
a  is  located  at  the 
sitate  to  say,"  he 
Paris,  in  1783,  in 
nch  they  have  so  ^ 
id  were  governed 
nt  to  Sir  William 
boundary,  by  the 

the  source  of  the 
This  objection 
ned  in  the  treaty 
:ase.    The  word    * 
erous  documents 
the  word  high- 
lighlands  which 
le  term  denotes 
water  take  their 
let  of  country  is 
J  it  by  no  means 
The  very  fact 
ws  that  it  is  the 

by  the  map  A, 
slineation  of  the 

by  the  United 
Jrs  of  the  Metis, 
branches  of  the 
Jrent  directions 
id,  and  this  an- 
ersection  to  the 
e  waters.     We 
lether  they  are 
he  description 
id  down  upon 
vhere  they  are 
elevated  than      j 

United  States 
lins,  by  which 
«^eyed  is  about 

'.be  1,500  feet 

[ill,  the  north 

I  which  divide 

Johnson,  the 


19 


[431] 


American  surveyor,  says  that  this  ridge,  which  is  called  Sugar  mountain, 
is  evidently  the  hio^hest  land  on  the  line,  from  the  source  of  the  St.  Croix 
to  that  place.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  British  surveyor,  Mr.  Banchette's 
vertical  section,  by  which  it  appears  that  this  mountain  (north  of  the  river 
St.  .Tohn's)  is  more  than  500  feet  higher  than  the  highest  peak  of  Mars  Hill, 
or  more  than  2,000  feet  above  the  surface  of  the  river  St.  John's. 

The  exact  elevation  of  the  point  claimed  by  us  as  the  northwest  angle  of 
Nova  Scotia  cannot  be  stated.  But  making  every  due  allowance  for  the 
slight  differences  between  the  statements  of  the  two  surveyors,  it  appears 
clearly  that  the  dividing  ridge  at  about  144  miles  from  the  monument,  (the 
point  A  on  map  A,)  is  somewhat,  but  not  much  lower  than  the  ridge  at  132 
miles,  presumed  to  be  the  highest  spot  on  the  whole  line ;  and  that  its 
elevation  may  therefore  be  estimated  at  about  2,000  feet  above  the  level  of 
the  sea. 

Let  any  person  cast  his  eye  upon  map  A,  and  trace  the  tributaries  of  the 
Ristigouche,  and  the  streams  which  rise  in  that  section,  and  he  will  be 
sensible  that  thr-^^^  is  an  elevated  tract  between  the  Grand  Fourche,  the  last 
tributary  of  ihc  '^ti?:ouche,  crossed  by  the  American  line  in  its  course 
northward,  ar  .1  »  m  c  river,  the  source  of  the  Metis.  And  what  appears 
obvious  from  tht  .atiuire  of  the  case,  is  affirmed  by  Mr.  Odell,  the  British 
surveyor.  He  tells  us  that  the  "  general  face  of  the  country  may  be  con- 
sidered as  increasing  moderately  in  elevation  from  the  Ristigouche  north, 
ward,  to  within  two  or  three  miles  of  the  Grand  Fourche,  and  then  de- 
scending rapidly  to  that  stream.  Immediately  after  crossing  the  Grand 
Fourche,  the  ground  rises  very  steeply  for  about  three-quarters  of  a  mile, 
and  very  moderately  for  a  quarter  of  a  mile  more,  and  then  descends  mod- 
erately all  the  way  to  Beaver  river." 

Mr.  Johnson,  the  United  States  surveyor,  sptaking  of  the  same  country, 
says  :  "  Proceeding  north  from  the  last  mentioned  ridge,  the  land  continues 
voy  high,  though  not  very  uneven,  to  144  miles,  where  the  land  is  nearly 
as  high  as  at  132  miles,  and  is  the  ridge  which  divides  the  waters  emptying 
themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  which  flow  into  the  Atlantic 
ocean.  On  the  top  of  this  ridge,  at  the  distance  of  144  miles,  is  a  large 
yellow  birch  tree ;  from  this  point  to  Beaver  creek,  there  is  a  general  and 
very  considerable  descent,  interrupted  by  a  few  places  of  rising  ground  for 
a  short  distance." 

From  the  imperfect  surveys  that  have  been  made  of  the  highlands  near 
the  tributaries  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  it  is  impossible  to  speak  with  certainty 
of  their  altitude ;  but  no  man,  unbiassed  by  party  feeling,  can  for  a  moment 
doubt  the  existence  of  highlands  in  that  region ;  and  whether  they  are  ten 
hundred  or  ten  thousand  feet  above  the  level  of  the  ocean,  they  answer 
equally  well  the  description  of  the  treaty ;  they  are  highlands  which  divide 
the  rivers. 

But  Great  Britain  maintains  that  the  north'line  from  the  monument  must 
terminate  at  a  mountain,  and  continue  along  a  mountain  range.  Let  us 
apply  this  principle  to  the  line  for  which  she  contends  :  Does  she  find  a 
cliain  of  mountains  running  south  and  west  of  Mars  Hill  ?  Mr.  Partridge, 
the  American  surveyor,  speaking  of  this  subject,  says :  "  Mars  Hill  is  an 
insulated  eminence,  having  no  connexion,  that  I  could  discover,  with  any 
ridge  of  highlands.  To  the  northwest  and  north,  the  country  appears  to 
rise  pretty  uniformly,  and  finally  to  terminate  in  a  ridge  of  eleva;ted  land, 
which  extends,  to  appearance,  nearly  in  a  northeast  and  southwest  direction 
as  far  as  the  eye  can  reach.    Indeed,  the  whole  country  to  the  west,  and 


[4311 


20 


as  far  north  as  the  ridge  just  mentioned,  settincr  aside  the  small  inequalities 
on  its  surface,  appears  to  form  one  immense  inclined  plain  fronting  towards 
the  south,  with  a  gentle  inclination  to  the  east." 

George  W.  Coffin,  Esq.,  land  agent  of  this  Commonwealth,  who  ran  the 
line  now  contended  for  by  Great  Britain,  in  1828,  in  a  note  addiessed  to 
a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Public  Lands,  says :  "  At  the  request  of 
the  Hon.  'Albert  Gallatin  and  the  Hon.  William  P.  Preble,  agents  of  the 
United  States,  on  the  subject  of  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  United  States, 
that  a  survey  should  be  made  under  the  particular  and  personal  superin- 
tendence of  the  land  agents  of  the  two  States,  to  ascertain  the  true  charac- 
ter of  the  dividing  ridge  contended  for  by  the  British  Government,  as  the 
boundary  of  the  State  of  Maine,  and  of  the  United  States,  Daniel  Rose, 
Esq.,  then  the  land  agent  of  the  State  of  Maine,  accompanied  me,  in  the 
autumn  of  the  year  1828,  to  the  summit  of  Mars  Hill.  We  ascended  to  the 
top  of  the  observatory  erected  on  the  hill ;  the  atmosphere  being  tolerably 
clear,  we  had  an  extensive  view  of  the  surrounding  country,  which  ap- 
peared generally  to  be  very  level,  with  the  exception  of  some  few  emi- 
nences, of  which  we  took  the  bearing  of  the  discoverable  heights,  as  fol- 
lows :  A  high  mountain,  called  Chase's  mountain,  and,  by  the  Indians, 
Marcharchuse,  bore  north  64°  west,  about  forty  miles  distant ;  two  high 
hills  at  the  head  of  Aroostook  Presque  Isle,  south  73°  west ;  a  high  peaked 
mountain,  bearing  north  43°  west,  which  our  guide  informed  us  was  a  lit- 
tle south  of  the  Aroostook  river,  about  thirty  miles  distant ;  also,  two  high 
hills  at  the  head  of  the  St.  John's  Presque  Isle,  bearing  north  41°  west, 
distant  about  twelve  or  fifteen  miles.  The  atmosphere  of  the  southern 
section  being  smoky,  we  could  not  see  Mount  Katakdin.  Mars  Hill  it- 
self is  a  sugar-loaf  hill,  conspicuous  only  by  reason  of  its  standing  by  itself, 
an  isolated  spectacle,  having  no  connecting  chain  of  highlands. 

"  Pursuant  to  the  request  of  the  legitimate  agents  of  the  United  States,  we 
descended  to  the  western  base  of  Mars  Hill,  and  commenced  our  survey, 
keeping  an  account  of  the  ascent  and  descent  of  each  day's  survey,  passing 
the  sources  of  all  the  streams  in  our  course,  being  careful  not  to  cross  over 
any  water  that  we  could  not  step  over.  Most  of  the  distance  from  Mars 
Hill  to  the  souirce  of  the  east  branch  of  Penobscot  river,  we  found  to  be 
flat,  swampy,  hurricane  land,  with  now  and  then  some  hardwood  hills, 
rising  from  fifty  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  feet.  About  twelve  and  a  half 
miles  from  Mars  Hill,  we  came  to  a  high  hill ;  we  took  its  altitude,  and 
found  it  to  be  two  hundred  and  sixty-four  feet,  and  is  the  same  we  saw 
from  Mars  Hill,  bearing  north  41°  west,  which  was  the  only  considerable 
height  we  encountered  in  the  whole  survey ;  this  being  an  isolated  eleva- 
tion, it  appears  conspicuous  for  a  considerable  distance.  We  passed  about 
three  miles  north  of  Chase's  mountain,  and  finished  our  survey  for  that  spa- 
son  at  the  portage  between  Penobscot  and  the  Aroostook  rivers.  The  whole 
distance  was  chained,  being  fifty-two  miles,  and  the  rise  and  fall  carefully 
noted ;  and  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  without  fear  of  contradiction, 
that  the  waters  of  the  Penobscot  and  Aroostook  rivers  take  their  rise  in 
low  swampy  land,  with  some  trifling  undulations." 

From  this  representation,  given  by  the  land  agent,  of  Mars  Hill,  and  the 
country  dividing  the  waters  of  the  St.  John's  from  those  of  the  Penobscot, 
it  will  be  seen  that,  instead  of  a  mountain  range,  the  country  is  low  and 
flat,  with  here  and  there  a  little  eminence  rising  only  from  fifty  to  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  feet.    A  committee  of  our  own  Legislature,  who  visited  this 


sectior 
of  one 
near 
of  the I 
if  the 
the  till 
to  mai 
impi'oj 
provic 
desigl^ 


31 


[431] 


small  inequalities 
flouting  towards 

alth,  who  ran  the 
lote  addiessed  to 

t  the  request  of 
e,  agents  of  the 
le  United  States, 
•ersonal  superin- 
the  true  charac- 
I'ernment,  as  the 
Js,  Daniel  Rose, 
nied  me,  in  the 

ascended  to  the 

being  tolerably 
ntry,  which  ap- 
some  few  euji- 
heights,  as  fol- 
by  the  Indians, 
tant ;  two  high 
;  a  high  peaked 
ed  us  was  a  lit- 
also,  two  high 
lorth  41°  west, 
f  the  southern 

Mars  Hill  it- 

anding  by  itself, 
ids. 

nited  States,  we 
ed  our  survey, 
mrvey,  passing 
)t  to  cross  over 
ice  from  Mars 
e  found  to  be 
ardwood  hills, 
slve  and  a  half 
5  altitude,  and 
same  we  saw 
Y  considerable 
isolated  eleva- 
!  passed  about 
y  for  that  sea- 
s.  The  whole 
fall  carefully 
contradiction, 
their  rise  in 

Hill,  and  the 
le  Penobscot, 
y  is  low  and 
'  to  one  hun- 
a  visited  this 


section  in  1835,  say :  "  It  is  known  that  Webster  pond,  which  is  the  source 
of  one  of  the  large  branches  of  thi  east  fork  of  the  Penobscot,  approaches 
near  to  one  of  the  lakes  in  the  great  chain  of  lakes,  constituting  the  source 
of  the  Allagash  river,  a  large  tributary  of  the  St.  John's.  It  was  evident, 
if  the  waters  of  the  Allagash  could  be  made  to  flow  into  the  Penobscot,  that 
the  timber  of  this  extensive  and  productive  region  must  take  that  direction 
to  market.  ■The  value  of  these  lands  would  be  amazingly  enhanced,  if  an 
improvement  of  this  kind  ''hould  be  found  practicable.  The  committee 
provided  instruments  for  (aking  the  height  of  the  waters,  agreeably  to  the 
design,  and  for  the  purposes  suggested  heretofore.  It  was  found  that  the 
summit  level  between  the  waters  of  the  Allagash  lake  and  Webster  pond 
scarcely  exceeded  two  feet,  and  that  a  canal  about  one  hundred  rods  in 
length,  and  perhaps  six  feet  in  depth,  with  a  trifling  dam  at  the  outlet  of 
the  lake,  would  accomplish  all  that  was  desirable." 

I  This  statement  of  the  committee  confirms  the  s'.atement  of  the  land  agent 
and  of  Mr.  Partridge.  It  requires  no  great  kno  wledge  of  mountains  and 
the  waters  they  send  forth,  to  know  that  streams  are  never  large  at  the  sum- 
mit of  high  elevations.  The  fact  that  the  waters  of  the  Penobscot  and 
the  St.  John's  approach  within  one  hundred  rods  of  each  other,  and  are  in 
quantities  so  large  as  to  afford  navigation  for  lumber,  shows,  most  conclu- 
sively, that  the  dividing  ridge  cannot  bear  the  name  of  a  mountain.  This 
summit  scarcely  exceeds  two  feet ;  and  the  committee  assure  us  that  the 
streams  on  both  sides  of  the  summit  are  sufficiently  large  to  furnish  an  easy 
navigation  to  lumber ;  a  fact  which  proves,  beyond  a  doubt,  that  these 
rivers  have  their  sources  in  a  flat  level  country. 

Now,  does  this  dividing  land  answer  the  description  for  which  Great 
Britain  contends?  Is  an  fsolated  pyramid,  subsiding  into  a  marshy  bog,  a 
continuous  range  of  mountains  ?  The  very  idea  is  absurd.  The  land  di- 
viding the  waters  of  the  St.  John's  from  the  Penobscot  does  not  conform 
in  any  degree  to  the  definition  of  highlands,  for  which  the  British  Govern- 
ment contends.  And  the  fact  that  neither  Mars  Hill  nor  any  other  moun- 
tains between  the  St.  John's  and  the  Penobscot  are  laid  down  upon  the  ac- 
credited document,  Mitchell's  map,  shows,  conclusively,  that  the  commis- 
sioners, in  17S3,  could  not  have  contemplated  any  range  of  highlands  south 
of  the  St.  John's. 

Another  reason  why  Mars  Hill  cannot  be  the  highlands  of  the  treaty,  and 
one  to  which  we  have  already  alluded,  is,  that  it  does  not  divide  the  wa- 
ters which  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  which  empty  themselves 
into  the  Atlantic  ocean,  according  to  the  express  language  of  the  treaty. 
But  here  we  are  met  with  the  objection  that  the  Ristigoi.  he  and  the  St. 
John's  are  not  Atlantic  rivers,  the  former  falling  into  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs, 
and  the  latter  into  the  Bay  of  Fundy.  This  objection  is  founded  on  the 
position  that  the  Bay  of  Clialeurs  and  the  Bay  of  Fundy  are  not  the  Atlan- 
tic ocean,  or  any  part  of  the  Atlantic  ocean.  We  readily  allow  that  these 
and  other  bays  are  frequently  spoken  of  in  opposition  to  the  Atlantic  ocean  ; 
and  it  must  be  admitted,  on  the  other  hand,  that  they  are  frequently  spoken 
of  as  one  and  the  same  thing.  The  word  Atlantic  ocean  or  sea,  like  every 
other  term,  must  be  understood  in  a  sense  more  or  less  extensive,  accord- 
ing to  the  position  in  which  it  stands,  and  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  used. 
When  the  term  sea  or  ocean  is  used  in  its  broadest  sense,  it  includes  all  the 
gulfs  and  bays  with  which  it  is  connected ;  and  when  it  is  used  in  oppo- 
sition to  tiiem.  it  of  course  excludes  them. 


I 


[431] 


22 


B     ? 


1 

But  how,  or  in  what  sense,  is  it  used  in  the  treaty  of  17S3  ?  That  , 
instrument  speaks  of  the  Atlantic  ocean,  and  uses  that  term  in  contradis- 
t' '^ction  from  the  St.  Lawrence.  •'  Highlands  which  divide  the  rivers  which 
e;  )ty  themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  which  liill  into  the 
Atlantic  ocean."  Such  is  the  languaoe  of  the  treaty.  The  earlier  docu- 
ments use  the  word  sea  instead  of  Atlantic  ocean.  Here,  then,  the  treaty  \ 
contemplates  two  classes  of  rivers  :  those  that  run  northwesterly,  and  those  j 
that  run  southeasterly ;  those  that  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence,  and  tliose  ) 
iliat  flow  into  the  Atlantic  ocean.  All  the  rivers  that  flow  into  the  St.  Law-  ) 
ronce  constitute  one  class,  and  all  others  that  rise  in  these  highlands  con-  \ 
iUtute  the  other  class.  In  tiie  sense  of  this  clause  of  the  treaty,  the  Atlantic  ; 
ocean  is  used  generically,  and  includes  all  the  gulfs  and  bays  in  that  region,  \ 
except  the  St.  Lawrence,  with  which  it  is  contrasted.  This  is  the  obvious  l 
construction  of  the  treaty ;  and  we  are  unable  to  perceive  how  a  high-  j 
minded  and  honorable  nation  can  stand  before  the  world,  and  keep  herself  , 
in  countenance,  while  urging  her  plea. 

How  is  the  term  ocean  or  sea  generally  understood,  when  used  in  this 
nianner  ?  How  has  it  been  used  and  understood  by  Great  Britain  herself? 
In  the  preliminary  articles,  and  in  the  definitive  treaty  of  1783,  the  terms 
sea  and  Atlantic  ocean  frecuently  occur.  The  third  article,  which  relates 
to  the  subject  of  the  fisheries,  contains  these  words  :  "  It  is  agreed  that  the 
]i2ople  of  the  United  States  shall  continue  to  enjoy  unmolested  the  right  to 
take  fish  of  every  kind,  on  the^rand  hank  and  on  all  other  hanks  of  New- 
foundland ;  also  in  the  Gnlf  of  Si.  Lawrence,  and  at  all  other  places  in  the 
.sea,  where  the  inhabitants  of  both  countries  used  at  any  time  heretofore 
to  fish." 

In  this  article  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  is  used  as  synonymous  with 
.'^ca — "  in  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence,  and  all  other  places  in  the  5ta."  Now 
if  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  may  be  regarded  as  a  part  of  the  sea,  why  not 
(he  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  the  Bay  of  Fundy?  Nor  is  this  all ;  in  the  same 
treaty  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  is  denominated  the  ocean. 

Article  VIII.  "  The  navigation  of  the  river  Mississippi,  from  its  source 
to  the  ocean,  shall  forever  remain  free  and  open  to  the  subjects  of  Great 
Britain  and  the  citizens  of  the  United  States."  We  all  know  that  the  Mis- 
sissippi flows  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  but  in  the  treaty  it  is  said  to  flow  into 
the  ocean.  Now  who  would  risk  his  popularity  by  maintaining  that  the 
Mississippi  did  not  communicate  with  the  ocean,  because  that  particular  part 
of  the  ocean  is  by  way  of  distinction  ctdled  by  another  name  l  If  the  Mis- 
sissippi can  with  propriety  be  called  an  Atlantic  river,  if  it  can  be  affirmed 
of  it,  as  it  is  in  the  treaty,  that  it  empties  itself  into  the  ocean,  the  same  can 
be  said  of  the  St.  John's  and  the  Kistigouche.  These  examples  show  in 
what  sense  the  two  contracting  parties  use  the  terms  sea  cr  ocean. 

No  man  free  from  bias  can,  as  it  appears  to  us,  read  the  treaty  without 
being  fully  satisfied  that  the  commissioners  regarded  the  Kistigouche  and 
St.  John's  as  Atlantic  rivers.  It  was  so  undcrsrood  by  the  British  Govern- 
ment itsel£  for  more  than  thirty  years  from  the  signing  of  the  treaty.  The 
British  statement  in  1707  not  only  acknowledged  that  the  line  north  from 
ihe  St.  Croix  must  cross  the  St.  John's,  but  affirmed  tliat  the  St.  John's 
was  an  Atlantic  river.  When  contending  for  the  western  branch  of  the 
St.  Croix,  their  agent  says,  "  had  the  treaty  intended  that  this  north  line 
sliould  intersect  a  number  of  rivers  which  empty  their  waters  through  a 
British  province  into  the  sea,"  c^c.    Here  tiie  British  agent  applies  the 


ii|-i<aw  M:iM:iiai"i»>iii' « ■«i«w*a 


23 


[431] 


ofl7S3?     That 
firm  in  contradis- 
e  the  rivers  whicli 
iich  fall  into  the 
I'lic  earlier  docu- 
.  tlien,  the  treaty 
!sterly,  and  tlioso 
'rence,  and  tJiose 
nto  the  St.  Law- 
G  Jiig'hlands  con- 
aty,  the  Atlantic 
s  in  that  region, 
lis  is  the  obvions 
ive  how  a  high- 
nnd  keep  herself 

len  used  in  this 
Britain  herself? 
1783,  the  terms 
e,  wliich  relates 
ngreed  tliat  the 
ed  the  right  to 
ban/iS  of  ^cw- 
er  places  in  the 
time  heretofore 

on5inons  with 
lie  stu:'  Now 
le  sea,  why  not 
1 ;  ill  the  same 


loni  its  source 
>jects  of  Great 
;hat  the  Mis- 
id  to  flow  info 
iniwg-  that  the 
xirticular  part 
■     If  the  Mis. 
in  be  aflirnied 
the  same  can 
pics  show  in 
can. 

■eaty  without 
tigouche  and 
tish  Govern- 
reaty.  The 
3  north  from 
e  St.  John's 
ranch  of  the 
is  north  line 
•s  through  a 
apphes  the 


I  term  sea  to  such  inlets  as  the  Bay  of  Chaleurs  and  Bay  of  Fiindy.    But 

\  it  is  not  by  implication  alono  that  he  allows  this ;  he  assures  us  that  the  St. 

\  John's  fulls  into  the  sea.     When  contending  for  the  western  liead  of  the  St. 

I  Croix,  ho  says,  "  a  line  drawn  north  from  that  terminatipn  upon  the  maps 

,;  will  not  intersect  any  of  the  rivers  which  empty  themselves  into  the  sea, 

\  north  of  the  mouth  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  except  the  St.  Johti's." 

i      If  it  were  necessary  to  produce  any  farther  concessions  of  the  British 

!  Government,  we  could  refer  to  the  treaty  of  Ghent,  where  the  terra  Ailan- 

I  tic  ocean  is  used  to  include  all  gulfs  and  bays,  and  inlets  of  every  descrip- 

\  tion.    In  the  second  article  of  that  treaty,  it  is  provided  that  all  vessels 

I  captured  in  certain  parts  of  the  ocean  shall  be  given  up,  if  the  capture 

i  takes  place  a  certain  number  of  days  after  the  ratification  of  the  treaty.    In 

]  that  treaty,  we  find  words  of  this  kind :  "  sixty  days  for  the  Atlantic  ocean, 

i   south  of  the  equator,  as  far  as  the  latitude  of  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope." 

I    In  this  quotation,  and  several  others  that  might  be  made  from  that  article, 

■   the  term  Atlantic  ocean  is  used  to  include  all  bays,  harbors,  and  waters 

j    connected  with  the  ocean. 

But  Great  Britain  gravely  asserts,  in  opposition  to  all  this,  in  direct  re- 
pugnance to  the  plain  sense  of  the  treaty,  and  her  own  numerous  conces- 
sions, that  the  Bay  of  Fundy  cannot  be  considered  as  a  part  of  the  ocean. 
And  what  is  her  argument  in  support  of  this  assertion  ?  Why,  she  tells  us 
that  in  the  treaty  itself,  the  Bay  of  Fundy  is  spoken  of  in  contradistinction 
from  the  ocean.  As  this  is  her  main  argument,  we  will  give  it  a  passing 
notice.  The  second  article  of  the  treaty,  after  describing  the  boundary  line 
inland,  adds  :  •'  comprehending  all  islands,  within  twenty  leagues  of  any 
part  of  the  shores  of  the  United  States,  and  lying  between  lines  to  be  drawn 
due  east  from  the  points  where  the  aforesaid  boundaries  between  Nova 
Scotia  on  the  one  part,  and  East  Florida  on  the  other,  shall  respectively 
touch  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  the  Atlantic  ocean,  excepting  such  islands  as 
now  are,  or  heretofore  have  been,  within  the  limits  of  the  said  province  of 
Nova  Scotia." 

This  clause  of  the  treaty  bounds  the  United  States  on  the  ocean  ;  it  de- 
clares that  all  the  islands  within  twenty  leagues  of  the  shore  shall  be  in- 
cluded within  the  United  States.  But  it  was  necessary  to  fix  the  northern 
and  southern  terminus  of  this  line  drawn  in  the  ocean  sixty  miles  from  the 
shore  ;  and  for  this  purpose  the  treaty  provides  that  lines  shall  be  drawn 
due  east  from  the  points  where  our  land  boundary  line  touches  the  ocean. 
It  was  desirable  that  these  points  should  be  fixed  with  as  much  certainty 
as  the  case  would  admit  of;  and  consequently  they  designate  the  point  from 
which  the  southern  line  shall  be  drawn  due  east,  by  saying  where  the 
boundary  of  East  Florida  shall  touch  the  Atlantic  ocean.  This  was  all 
that  could  well  be  said  in  that  case.  The  St.  Mary's  river  fell  into  the 
ocean  that  was  our  southern  boundary.  There  was  no  particular  bay 
whose  name  could  have  been  used,  to  designate  what  precise  portion  of  the 
ocean  ;  was  intended.  But  when  they  came  to  the  northern  boundary,  they 
could  bo  more  definite.  Our  line  in  that  quarter  reaches  the  ocean  in  a 
portion  of  it  which  has  a  distinctive  name ;  consequently,  instead  of  using 
the  geneial  term  ocean,  the  more  specific  term  Bay  of  Fundy  is  employed. 
But  does  this  prove  that  the  Bay  of  Fundy  is  no  part  of  the  ocean  ?  By  no 
means.  This  bay,  lilve  all  others  on  our  coast,  is  a  pprt  of  the  ocean,  and 
the  distinctive  term  Bay  of  Fundy,  is  used  to  indicate  what  particular  part 
of  the  osean  is  intended.    This  report  of  the  committee  is  dated  "  Com' 


[431] 


t24 


monwealth  of  Massachusetts,"  also,  "in  Senate;"  but  would  any  sound 
critic,  any  fair  minded  man,  maintain  that,  because  Massachusetts  and 
Senate  are  both  used,  the  Senate  chamber  was  not  within  the  Common- 
wealth? We  think  not.  But  we  are  not  able  to  perceive  that  the  inference 
is  any  less  clear  in  this  case  than  in  the  other. 

But  where  would  the  reasoning  of  Great  Britain  carry  us?  and  what 
absurdities  would  it  not  involve  !  Suppose,  for  the  sake  of  the  case,  that 
the  Ristigouche  id  St.  John's  are  not  rivers  that  flow  into  the  Atlantic  in 
the  sense  of  the  treaty ;  then  they  must  be  excluded,  as  not  constituting 
either  of  the  classes  of  rivers  mentioned  in  that  instrument.  The  word 
divide  implies  a  near  proximity  or  contiguity  of  the  thing  divided.  Take  the 
boundary  for  which  England  contends,  and  what  rivers  does  it  separate  ? 
Not  rivers  which  flow  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from  those  that  flow  into  the 
ocean ;  but,  according  to  her  argument,  these  highlands  divide  the  rivers 
that  flow  into  the  Bay  of  Fundy  from  those  which  flow  into  the  Atlantic 
ocean.    But  this  does  not  conform  to  the  language  of  the  treaty. 

But  where  would  the  argument  of  Great  Britain  lead  us?  If  the  St. 
John's  is  not  an  Atlantic  river,  because  it  empties  into  the  Bay  of  Fundy, 
so  neither  is  the  Penobscot,  because  it  empties  into  the  Penobscot  bay.  The 
Kennebec  cannot  be  an  Atlantic  river,  because  it  empties  into  the  Bay  of 
Sagadahock.  On  the  same  ground  the  Connecticut  must  be  excluded,  be- 
cause it  empties  into  Long  Island  sound.  In  this  manner  we  could  exclude 
the  Hudson,  the  Delaware,  the  Potomac,  and  the  whole  class  of  Atlantic 
rivers.  They  empty  themselves  into  bays,  or  sounds,  or  harbors,  or  some 
branch  or  portion  of  the  Atlantic  which  bears  some  distinctive  name,  and, 
according  to  the  argument  of  the  British  Government,  they  cannot  bo 
rivers  which  empty  themselves  into  the  Atlantic  ocean. 

Thus  is  the  whole  Atlantic  border  interested  in  this  question.  The  same 
plea  which  is  to  deprive  Massachusetts  and  Maine  of  six  millions  of  their 
territory  will  cover  the  whole  seaboard  from  Maine  to  Georgia,  and  State 
after  State  may  be  called  upi)n  to  yield  large  portions  of  territory,  to  satisfy 
the  grasping  cupidity  of  a  foreign  nation.  But  we  will  not  spend  any 
more  time  upon  this  subject :  it  is  too  clear  to  require  any  argument.  The 
rivers  in  question  do  empty  themselves  into  those  portions  of  the  ocean 
designated  by  some  distinctive  name.  These  bays  are  parts  of  the  sea 
or  ocean.  And  every  school-boy  knows  that  a  "  gulf,  or  bay,  is  a  part  of 
the  sea  or  ocean  extending  into  the  land." 

There  is  another  brancli  of  this  controversy,  which  relates  to  the  head 
or  source  of  Connecticut  river.  The  treaty  declares  that  the  line  shall  pass 
along  the  highlands  "to  the  northwesternmost  head  of  Connecticut  river; 
from  thence  down,  along  the  middle  of  that  river,  to  the  forty-fifth  degree 
of  north  latitude ;  from  thence  due  west  on  said  latitude,"  &.c.  By  sur- 
veys made  under  the  commissioners  provided  for  by  the  Ghent  treaty,  it  is 
ascertained  that  there  are  four  of  those  branches  wiiich  have  their  sources 
in  the  highlands,  about  fifteen  or  twenty  miles  north  of  the  forty-fifth  de- 
gree of  latitude.  These  streams,  proceeding  from  west  to  east,  are  now 
known  by  the  respective  names  of  Hall's  stream,  Indian  stream,  Perry's 
stream,  and  Main  Connecticut.  The  last  three  streams  are  all  united  into 
one,  about  two  miles  north  of  the  forty  fifth  parallel  of  north  latitude,  and, 
thus  united,  they  form  what  was  known  by  the  commissioners  of  1783  as 
the  Connecticut  river,  and  it  was  then  supposed  that  this  union  was  at  the 
parallel  before  mentioned.  But  it  has  been  f^und  by  calculation  that  this 
imion  is  two  miles  north  of  that  parallel.  The  mouth  of  Hall's  stream,  known 


bythatnami 

above  mcnt 

it  has  been 

The  exp 

river,"  plaii 

river.    Th< 

is  the  nortl 

by  the  Uni 

teniplated  b 

of  ours  can 

The  tree 

run  and  ei 

that,  in  ca 

decision  of 

appointed, 

results,  anc 

by  the  con 

mitted  his 

of  the  hi^l 

the  questic 

He,  in  fi 

lands,  anc 

opinion  "t 

two  States 

the  point 

St.  John ; 

it,  to  the 

John;  tlv 

ing  it,  to 

boundary 

This  a 

various 

views  of 

the  awai 

the  cons 

ceptance 

majesty 

had  no 

After 

Senate  o 

open  a  n 

bounda 

assert  fii 

over  wh 

diction  ? 

can  nev 

ported 

Mr.  U 
Charge 
him  tha 
sisrned 
are  una 
icill  pre 


s 


ly  sound 
}(ls  and 
)mmon- 
[iference 

lid  what 
[ise,  that 
lantic  in 
stitutiuir 
lie  word 
\ike  the 
jparate  ? 
I  into  the 
le  rivers 
[Atlantic 

'  the  St. 

Fiindy, 

^    The 

;  Bay  of 

ided,  be- 

excliide 

Atlantic 

or  some 

me,  and, 

innot  be 

he  same 
of  their 
id  State 
o  satisfy 
jnd  any 
t.  The 
le  ocean 
the  sea 
part  of 

le  head 
lall  pass 
!t  river; 
degree 
By  sur- 
ty,  it  is 
sources 
ifth  de- 
re  now 
Perry's 
;ed  into 
le,  and, 
1783  as 
s  at  the 
lat  this 
k-nown 


as 


[431] 


by  that  name  in  1783,  is  below,  and  al  ut  a  quarter  of  a  mile  south  of,  the  union 
above  mentioned,  but  above,  and  a  half  a  mile  north  of,  this  parallel,  as 
it  has  been  fixed  by  later  and  more  correct  observations. 

The  expression  in  the  treaty,  "  northwestcrnmost  head  of  Connecticut 
river,"  plainly  implies  that  there  are  more  than  one  head  or  source  of  that 
river.  The  surveys  show,  at  once,  that  the  middle  branch  of  Hall's  stream 
is  the  northwestcrnmost  head  of  that  river,  and  it  is  accordingly  claimed 
by  the  United  States  as  the  true  northwesteinmost  head  of  the  river  con- 
templated by  the  t  rcaty.  Believing  this  subject  to  be  as  clear  as  any  remarks 
of  ours  can  make  it,  we  will  not  pursue  this  branch  of  the  subject. 

The  treaty  of  Ghent  provided  that  commissioners  should  be  appointed  lo 
run  and  establish  the  boundary  line ;  it  was  also  provided  in  that  treaty 
that,  in  case  of  disagreement,  the  whole  subject  should  be  referred  for 
decision  of  some  friendly  power.  Under  this  treaty,  commissioners  were 
appointed,  and  after  some  five  years  of  examination  they  came  to  different 
results,  and  the  whole  subject  was  submitted  to  the  King  of  the  Netherlands 
by  the  convention  of  1827.  His  majesty,  after  examining  the  subject,  sub- 
mitted his  decision  or  award  in  1831 ;  but  this  award  was  rejected  by  both 
of  the  high  contracting  parties,  on  the  ground  that  the  arbiter  did  not  decide 
the  question  submitted. 

He,  in  fact,  confesses  that  he  cannot  decide  upon  the  question  of  the  high- 
lands, and  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  and  finally  gives  it  as  his 
opinion  "that  it  will  be  convenient  or  suitable  to  adopt,  as  the  boundary  of  the 
two  States,  a  line  drawn  due  north  from  the  source  of  the  river  St.  Croix  to 
the  point  where  it  intersects  the  middle  of  the  deepest  channel  of  the  river 
St.  John ;  thence  the  middle  of  the  deepest  channel  of  that  river,  ascending 
it,  to  the  point  where  the  river  St.  Francis  empties  itself  into  tlie  river  St. 
John ;  thence  the  middle  of  the  deepest  channel  of  the  St.  Francis,  ascend- 
ing it,  to  the  source  of  its  southwosternmost  branch,"  <fec.  This  proposed 
boundary  is  indicated  on  the  subjoined  map  A  by  a  dotted  line. 

This  award  was  submitted  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  and,  though 
various  motions  were  made  and  votes  taken,  the  vote  which  tested  the 
views  of  that  body  stood  thirty-five  to  eight.  Thus,  instead  of  sustaining 
the  award  of  the  King  of  the  Netherlands  by  a  majority  of  two-thirds,  as 
the  constitution  requires,  more  than  three-fourths  were  opposed  to  the  ac- 
ceptance of  it.  The  award  was  rejected  principally  on  the  ground  that  his 
majesty  had  not  decided  the  question  submitted,  and  that  the  United  States 
had  no  authority  to  cede  any  portion  of  the  State  of  Maine. 

After  the  rejection  of  the  award  of  the  King  of  the  Netherlands,  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States  passed  a  resolution  advising  the  President  to 
open  a  new  negotiation  with  the  British  Government  on  the  subject  of  the 
boundary.  But  how  did  the  President  renew  this  negotiation '?  Did  lie 
assert  firmly  the  claim  of  the  United  States  to  this  territory — a  territory 
over  which  we  had,  for  more  than  thirty  years,  exercised  undisputed  juris- 
diction ?  No ;  he  begins  with  a  kind  of  concession,  that  the  treaty  of  1783 
can  never  be  executed,  and  with  an  implied  design  to  accede  to  the  unsup- 
ported claim  of  Great  Britain. 

Mr.  Livingston,  in  his  note  of  July  21,  1832,  to  Mr.  Bankhead,  the 
Charge  d'Affaires  of  Great  Britain,  the  very  note  in  which  he  informed 
him  that  the  Senate  had  refused  to  accept  the  award,  says,  "  The  under- 
signed is  instructed  to  say,  that,  even  if  the  negotiators  of  the  two  parties 
are  unable  to  agree  on  the  true  line,  designated  by  the  treaty  of  1783,  means 
idIU  probably  be  found  of  avoiding  the  constiltitional  difficidties  that  have 


[431] 


20 


hitherto  attended  the  establislimeiit  of  a  boundary  more  convenient  to  both 
parties  than  that  designated  by  the  treaty,  or  that  rccommeirdcd  l)y  his 
majesty  the  King  of  the  Netherlands,  an  arrangement  being  now  in  pro- 
gress, loilh  every  probab'ditj/  of  a  spccdi/  conclusion,  between  the  United 
States  and  tiie  State  of  Maine,  by  which  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  will  be  clothed  with  7nore  maple  jwwcrs  than  it  has  heretofore  pos- 
iesscd,  to  cll'ect  that  end." 

Now,  what  might  be  expected  from  such  a  renewal  of  the  negotiation  i 
Great  Jiritain  had,  in  ISM,  expressed  a  desire  to  possess  a  portion  of  our 
territory,  lying  between  Uuobec  and  Halifax;  but  s; he  was  told  in  reply 
that  our  Government  had  no  constitutional  powur  to  cede  that  territory. 
On  this  ground,  principally,  was  the  awnrd  of  the  King  of  the  Netherlands 
rejected,  lint  this  new  negotiation  was  opened  with  an  assurance  in  ad- 
vance, that,  if  the  negotiators  could  not  agree  upon  the  line  designated  by 
the  treaty,  means  would  jnohably  he  found  of  avoiding  this  tonstilutional 
dijjicnlty  ;  that  there  was  every  probability  that  more  ample  powers  would 
speedily  be  given  to  the  President.  Mr.  Livingston  expressly  states,  in  his 
note,  that  the  Senate  had  advised  the  President  to  open  a  negotiation  for 
the  ascertainment  of  the  boundary  "according  to  the  treaty  of  peace  of 
1783  ;"  but  the  President  volunteers  the  assurance,  that,  if  they  could  not 
agree  upon  that  line,  there  was  every  probability  that  he  should  be  speedily 
clothed  with  power  to  avoid  the  constitutional  difliculty,  that  is,  with 
power  to  yield  some  of  our  territory !  And  to  make  the  concession  the 
more  perfect,  to  strengthen,  as  it  would  seem,  the  claims  of  Great  Britain, 
he  proposes  to  yield  our  jurisdiction  in  a  territory  over  which  we  had  ex- 
ercised an  uninterrupted  jurisdiction  for  a  half  century.  His  words  are  : 
"  Until  this  matter  shall  be  brought  to  a  final  conclusion,  the  necessity  of 
refraining,  on  both  sides,  from  any  exercise  of  jurisdiction  beyond  the 
boundaries  now  actually  possessed,  must  be  apparent,  and  will,  no  doubt, 
be  acquiesced  in  on  tlie  part  of  his  Britannic  Majesty's  provinces,  as  it  will 
be  by  the  United  States." 

We  ask  again,  what  might  be  expected  to  result  from  a  negotiation  com- 
menced with  such  concessions  ?  Could  any  man  believe  that  Great  Britain, 
skilled  in  all  the  arts  of  diplomacy,  would  settle  this  controversy  according 
to  the  obvious  language  of  the  treaty,  when  she  had  the  assurance  thtit 
other  terms  would,  in  all  probability,  be  acceded  to,  and  that  speedily  / 
Certainly  not.  Under  these  assurances,  no  reasonable  hope  could  have 
been  entertained  that  the  British  cabinet  would  attempt  even  to  ascertain 
the  true  boundary  described  in  the  treaty.  She  would  have  been  as  blind  to 
her  own  interest  in  making  such  an  attempt,  as  our  own  Government  was 
neglectful  of  its  duty  in  intimating  that  other  terms  would  be  proposed, 
in  case  of  disagreement. 

But  how  did  Great  Britain  meet  this  proposal,  to  ascertain  the  true 
boundary  designated  by  the  treaty  ?  Sir  Charles  11.  Vaughan,  in  answer  to 
Mr.  Livingston,  after  alluding  to  the  statement  that  the  boundary  was  to  be 
sought  "according  to  the  treaty  of  peace  of  17S3,"says:  "His  Majesty's 
Government  regret  that  they  cannot  discover,  in  this  proposal,  any  probablu 
means  of  arriving  at  a  settlement  of  this  difficult  question.  It  appears  to 
his  Majesty's  Government  to  be  utterly  hopeless  to  attempt  to  find  out,  at 
this  time  of  day,  by  means  of  a  new  negotiation,  an  assumed  line  of  boun- 
dary which  successive  negotiators,  and  commissioners  employed  on  the 
spot,  have,  during  so  many  years,  failed  to  discover." 

Here  we  see  that  the  British  Government  did  just  what  might  have  been 


Lxpcctcd,  c 

tained  ace 

posal,  that  ( 

says:  "lli^ 

jir'obable  cl 

vital  coMsot 

Governmei 

voring  to 

principki  o 

to  contemp 

hitherto  di 

such  as  I\li 

has  yet  bei 

Blaine." 

Concern 

Governmo 

of  continui 

tending  th 

the  limits 

authorities 

Mr.  Liv 

ject  of  agr 

United  St( 

British  mi 

Govern  nic 

boundary, 

the  river  ^ 

ingston,  ir 

Vanghan't 

u:\vigatioi; 

part  of  the 

nicnt  bou 

now  insis 

Again, 

thai  "a  lin( 

these  higl 

tjie  Ih'ilis 

ground  tl 

and  so  ei; 

2   ill  of  A 

jretcnsio 

curate  si 

should  pi 

be  found 

would  a 

natural  ' 

tion." 

To  mi 
poses  to 
Mr.  McI 
1834,  sa 
the  prop 


«7 


[431] 


lent  to  both 
nJcd  |jy  liis 
now  in  pro- 
tlio  United 
tlio  iriiited 
eloj'orc  jjos- 

icgotintioii  t 
rtioii  of  onr 
d  in  rc]iiy 
at  territory. 
Vctlierlands 
ince  in  nd- 
signated  by 
nstihttional 
nuers  would 
tatcs,  in  liis 
Cotiation  for 
of  pence  of 
y  could  not 
be  speedily 
lat  is,  with 
icession  the 
■eat  Britain, 
we  had  ex- 
words  are : 
necessity  of 
beyond  the 
I,  no  doubt, 
3S,  as  it  will 

iation  com- 
rcat  JJritain, 
{  according 
n-ance  th;it 
t  speedily  I 
:ould  have 
0  ascertain 
as  blind  to 
nrnent  was 
!  proposed, 

n  the  true 
answer  to 

r  was  to  be 
i  Majesty's 
ly  probabiu 
appears  to 
ind  out,  at 
le  of  boun- 
ed  on  the 

have  been 


expected,  express  its  decided  opinion  that  the  line  could  never  be  ascer« 
taincd  according,'  to  the  treaty  of  1783;  but,  in  relation  to  the  other  pro- 
posal, that  of  obtaining  |)o\ver  to  cede  territory  to  tireat  Britain,  Sir  Charles 
says:  "His  ^Majesty's' (Jovernmcnt  will  tog-evljf  avail  themselves  of  any 
probable  chai.  ■'  of  brinijing  to  a  satisfactory  settlement  a  question  of  such 
vital  consequence  to  the  harmony  and  good  understanding  between  the  two 
Governments ;  and  the  undersigned  is  instructed  to  lose  no  time  in  endea- 
voring to  ascertain  from  iMr.  Livingston,  in  the  first  place,  what  is  the 
principle  of  the  plan  of  boundary  which  the  American  Govcrnmem  appear 
to  contempliite  as  likely  to  be  more  convenient  to  both  parties  than  those 
hitherto  discussed;  and,  secondly,  whether  any,  and  what  arrangement, 
such  as  Mr.  Livingston  alludes  to,  for  avoiding  the  constitutional  diiliculiy, 
has  yet  been  concluded  between  the  General  Government  and  the  State  of 
Maine." 

Concerning  the  subject  of  jurisdiction,  Sir  Charles  says:  "His  Majesty's 
Government  entirely  concur  with  that  of  the  United  States,  in  the  principle 
of  continuing  to  abstain,  during  the  progress  of  the  negotiation,  from  ex- 
tending the  exercise  of  jurisdiction  within  the  disputed  territory  beyond 
the  limits  within  which  it  has  hitherto  been  usually  exercised  by  the 
authorities  of  either  party." 

Mr.  Livingston,  in  his  note  above  alluded  to,  in  connexion  with  the  sub- 
ject of  agreeing  upon  a  convenient  line,  intimates  that,  in  such  a  case,  the 
United  States  would  desire  the  right  of  navigation  in  tlie  St.  John's.  The 
British  minister  rejects  this  proposition  at  once,  lie  says :  "His  Majesty's 
Government  cannot  consent  to  embarrass  the  negotiation  respectinj^  the 
boundary,  by  mixing  up  with  it  a  discussion  respecting  the  navigation  of 
the  river  St.' John's  as  an  integral  part  of  the  same  (juestion."  Mr.  Liv- 
ingston, in  liis  note  of  April  30,  1833,  in  answer  to  the  [jortion  of  Mr. 
Vanghan's  note  last  cited,  says :  "  As  the  suggestion,  in  relation  to  the 
navigation  of  the  St.  John's,  was  introduced  only  in  view  of  its  forming  a 
part  of  the  system  of  compensations  in  the  negotiations  for  a  more  conve- 
nient boundary,  if  that  of  the  treaty  of  1783  should  be  abandoned,  is  not 
now  insisted  on.^' 

Again,  Mr.  Livingston  having  intimated  in  his  note  of  the  30th  of  April, 
that  a  line  niiirht  be  drawn  from  the  moniuuent  to  the  highlands,  though 
these  highlands  should  jiot  be  found  due  north  from  the  monument,  and 
the  ]?ritish  minister  in  his  note  of  the  Uth  of  May  objecting  to  this,  on  the 
ground  that  these  highlands  might  be  cast  of  the  meridian  of  the  St.  Croix, 
and  so  encroach  upon  the  province  of  New  Brunswick  ;  in  his  note  of  the 
2  :h  of  May,  Mr.  Livingston  says:  "  The  American  Government  make  no 
pretensions  further  cast  than  that  (a  due  north)  line  ;  but  if,  on  a  more  ac- 
curate survey,  it  should  be  found  that  the  line  mentioned  in  the  treaty 
should  pass  each  of  the  highlands  therein  described,  and  that  they  should 
be  found  at  some  ])oin.t  further  7cest,  then  the  principles  to  which  1  refer 
would  apply,  to  wit :  that  the  direction  of  the  line  to  connect  the  two 
natural  boundaries  imist  be  altered,  so  as  to  suit  their  ascertained  posi- 
tion." 

To  make  this  halfway  concession  the  more  palatable,  the  President  pro- 
poses to  add  another  more  perlect,  on  condition  they  will  accept  the  first. 
Mr.  McLane,  in  a  letter  to  Sir  Charles  Vaughan,  under  date  of  March  11, 
1834,  says:  "The  President  luis  directed  the  undersigned  to  say,  that  if 
the  proposition  he  has  caused  to  be  made  be  acceded  to  by  his  Majesty's 


. 


[431] 


28 


Government,  notwilhstnndino:  he  docs  not  ndmit  the  oMigiitory  cflcct  of  the 
decision,  or  rather  opinion  of  the  arbiter  on  the  point,  he  is  willing  to  take 
the  stream  sitnated  farthest  to  tlie  northwest,  anionji;'  those  which  fall  into 
the  northernmost  of  the  tlueo  hikes,  the  last  of  which  bears  the  name  of 
Connecticnt  lake,  as  the  northwesternmost  head  of  Connecticut  river,  ac- 
cording to  the  treaty  of  1783." 

Here  is  a  direct  pro))osition  to  cede  a  portion  of  territory  lying  witiiin  an 
independent  State.  The  President  nlhrms  that  he  docs  not  consider  the 
recommendation  at  nil  binding,  but  he  is  willing  to  give  uj>  the  boundary 
for  which  our  Government  has  heretofore  contended,  if  the  nritish  Govern- 
ment will  accede  to  his  other  proposition,  to  seek  for  the  highlands  on  the 
west  of  the  St.  Croix  meridian. 

The  progress  of  this  negotiation  from  its  commencement  in  July,  1S32, 
to  the  close  of  the  year  1834,  is  tridy  remarkable,  ^riie  President  is  di- 
rected by  a  resolution  of  the  Senate.to  renew  the  negotiation  for  the  ascer- 
tainment of  the  boundary  according  to  the  treaty  of  1783.  He  does  open 
the  negotiation  ;  but  in  the  very  first  proposition  made  to  the  British  Gov- 
ernment, he  assures  them  that  means  will  undoubtedly  be  taken  to  es- 
tablish a  conventional  line,  if  the  true  line  cannot  be  agreed  upon.  The 
British  Government  assure  the  President,  as  might  have  been  expected, 
that  it  was  in  vain  to  look  for  the  line  accordingto  the  treaty.  Thus,  in- 
stead of  obeying  the  advice  of  the  Senate,  and  securing  to  the  United 
States  and  to  the  State  of  Maine  that  territory  which  for  more  than  thirty 
years  had  been  claimed  by  our  Government,  and  conceded  by  Great  Brit- 
ain, the  Executive  opens  the  negotiation  with  an  admission  in  advance 
that  our  claim  was  doubtful,  and  that  he  was  taking  measures  which  would 
nndoubtedly  enable  him  to  yield  to  them  some  portion  of  our  territory. 
What  could  be  expected  to  result  from  such  negotiation  t  Such  diplomacy 
argues  a  total  dereliction  of  duty  on  the  part  of  the  Executive  ;  and  merits 
the  decided  disapprobation  of  the  American  people. 

But  to  keep  up  appearances,  the  Executive  intimates  to  the  British  Gov- 
ernment that  he  desires  the  free  navigation  of  the  river  St.  John  ;  but 
when  he  is  told  in  reply  that  this  cannot  be  granted,  he  meekly  replies, 
that  it  ?/;///  not  ha  insisted  upon.  The  Executive  propojies  to  seek  for  the 
hiorhlands  without  the  line  described  in  the  treaty  of  1783  ;  Great  Britain 
objects  to  searching  for  these  highlands  on  the  east  of  the  St.  Croix  merid- 
ian, and  the  Executive  assures  them  that  he  does  not  intend  to  look  for  them 
on  the  east,  but  designs  to  search  for  them  on  the  icest ;  or,  in  other  words, 
he  does  not  intend  to  claim  any  of  the  British  territory,  but  is  willing  to 
yield  a  part  of  our  own  ! 

And  how  was  this  received  by  Great  Britain  ?  Was  she  willing  to 
close  with  a  proposition  which  would,  in  all  probability,  give  her  n  por- 
tion of  our  territory?  No;  emboldened  by  these  concessions,  she  ex- 
tended her  claim  still  further.  She  at  first  was  willinsr  to  accept  the 
award  of  the  King  of  the  Netherlands ;  but  after  our  Government  had 
virtually  yielded  the  main  point,  and  by  implication  had  admitted  that 
there  were  no  highlands  due  nortli  from  the  monument,  north  of  the  St. 
John's,  she  assures  the  Executive  that  she  will  not  consent  to  the  line  re- 
commended by  the  arbiter,  and  will  yield  to  nothing  but  an  equal  divi- 
sion of  the  disputed  territory.  She  even  turns  upon  the  President,  and 
tells  him  that  lie  has  no  consti.titlional  ri^ht  to  seek  for  hi^'hlands  vyst  of 
a  due  north  line.     Mr.  Vauglian,  the  British  envoy,  under  date  of  Febru- 


ary 10,  19 
is  insunnn 
Netherlan 
ingsion,  (« 
if  theboui 
to  highlan 
darywou 
quires  the 
Croix;  n« 
line  of  th 
viation  frc 
And  w 
Great  Bri 
agents  of 
ing  a  con 
to"  Great 
Maine  co 
cently  pu 
surrender 
over  the 
St.  Franc 
any  port 
States,  if 
and  so  i 
acres  of 
surrende 
States  at 
the  treas 
It  will 
therewill 
Executi^ 
and  autl 
in  the 
Commoi 
without 
parties- 
tary  of  t 
half  of 
Nichola 
have  al 
the  con 
lures  w 
As  this 
it,  we 
This 
with  re 
it  assm 
sident ' 
who  w 
the  pre 
Great 
ingou 


2S) 


[431] 


oflect  of  tlic 

lliiig  lo  take 

icirfjill  into 

tlio  name  of 

lU  rivtir,  ac- 

^  within  m 
coiisidor  tho 
10  bniuidiiiy 
sh  (lioveni- 
ands  on  tho 

July,  1S3?, 
sidont  is  di- 
or  the  nsccr- 
0  dons  open 
British  Oov- 
taken  to  ps- 
iipon.     Tho 
Ml  expected, 
Thus,  in- 
the  United 
than  thirty 
Great  Brit- 
in  advance 
Hiicli  would 
iir  territory. 
Ii  diplomnry 
and  merits 

British  Gov- 
.  John  ;  but 
ekly  rephes, 
seek  for  tlie 
reat  Britain 
'roix  merid- 
>ok  for  tliem 
•ther  words, 
s  willinirto 

willing  to 
her  a  por- 
is,  she  ex- 
accept  the 
iment  had 
nitted  that 
of  the  St. 
he  lino  rc- 
jqual  divi- 
•ident,  and 
ds  ir/^s'i  of 
!  of  Febru- 


ary 10,  1931,  says;  "But  if  this  objection  (want  of  constitutional  power) 
is  insnrn)oinitablo,  as  against  tho  line  rcconinjendcd  by  the  King  of  the 
Netherlands,  would  it  not  bo  equally  fatal  to  that  suggested  by  Mr.  Liv- 
ingston, (seeking  for  highlands  on  tho  west  of  a  duo  north  line?)  Because, 
if  tho  boundary  was  formed  by  a  line  drawn  from  the  head  of  tho  St.  Croix 
to  highlands  found  to  the  westward  of  the  meridian  of  that  spot,  that  boun- 
durywould  not  be  tho  boundary  of  the  treaty,  seein;^  that  the  tr"aty  re- 
quires the  boundary  to  bo  run  aloii,  the  meridian  ot  tho  head  of  I'lo  St. 
Croix  ;  and  that  the  State  of  Maine  niight  object  to  any  deviation  If  >m  tho 
lino  of  the  treaty  in  a  westerly  direction,  as  justly  as  it  could  to  atiy  de- 
viation from  that  lino  in  a  southerly  direction." 

Atid  while  this  negotiation  was  going  on  between  the  United  State.,  and 
Great  Britain,  thp  President  was  carrying  on  a  secret  correspondence  with 
agents  of  the  State  of  Maine,  to  obtain  from  them  the  power  of  establish- 
ing a  conventional  line,  whereby  a  portion  of  that  Stale  would  be  ceded 
to  "Great  Britain.  The  proposition,  as  we  learn  from  a  letter  from  the 
Maine  commissioners  to  Governor  Smith,  dated  January  14,  J  833,  and  re 
ccntly  published,  v/as,  »  That  the  Legislature  of  Maine  should  provisionally 
surrender  to  the  United  States  all  claim  to  jurisdiction  and  right  of  soil 
over  the  territory  lying  north  of  the  river  St.  John,  and  east  of  the  river 
St.  Francis  ;  Maine,  in  such  case,  and  in  any  event,  to  be  indemnified  for 
any  portion  of  the  territory  thus  provisionally  surrendered  to  the  United 
States,  if  ultimately  lost  to  the  State,  by  adjoining  territory  to  be  acquired  ; 
and  so  far  as  that  should  prove  inadequate,  at  the  rate  of  one  million  of 
acres  of  land  in  Michigan  for  the  claim  to  and  over  the  whole  territory 
surrendered  ;  said  lands  thus  to  be  appropriated,  to  t>Q  sold  by  the  United 
States  at  their  expense,  and  the  proceeds  to  be  paid  without  deduction  into 
tho  treasury  of  the  State  of  Maine." 

It  will  be  seen  by  this  proposition,  and  the  correspondence  connected 
therewith,  and  recently  published  by  the  Legislature  of  Maine,  that  the 
Executive  of  the  United  States  was  desirous  of  being  clothed  with  power 
and  authority  to  cede  to  Great  Britain  2,195,360  acres  ci  land,  lying  with- 
in the  territory  of  Maine,  and  belonging  jointly  co  that  State  and  this 
Commonwealth.  In  fact,  a  treaty  (if  this  term  can  be  applied  to  a  paper 
without  title  or  date)  to  that  effect,  was  signed  by  the  high  contracting 
parties — by  Edward  Livingston,  Secretary  of  State,  Louis  McLane,  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  and  Levi  Woodbury,  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  in  be- 
half of  the  United  States  ;  and  by  William  P.  Preble,  Ruel  Williams,  and 
Nicholas  Emery,  commissioners  of  the  State  of  Maine,  in  her  behalf.  We 
have  already  intimated  that  this  instrument  is  without  date;  but  from 
the  correspondence  in  relation  to  that  subject,  it  appears  that  these  signa- 
tures were  affixed  to  that  instrument  some  time  in  the  summer  of  lS32. 
As  this  document  is  a  curiosity,  and  but  few  have  been  permitted  to  see 
it,  we  append  it  to  this  report. 

This  proposition  deserves  serious  consideration.  Whether  we  view  it 
with  reference  to  the  President  himself,  the  United  States,  or  Massachusetts, 
it  assumes  an  important  character.  In  what  attitude  does  it  place  the  Pre- 
sident ?  Why,  he  who  was  requested  by  the  resolution  of  the  Senate,  and 
who  was  bound  by  the  constitution  to  settle  this  controversy  according  to 
the  provisions  of  the  treaty  of  1783,  offers  to  purchase  our  peace  with 
Great  Britain  by  a  million  of  acres  of  Michigan  land !  Instead  of  sustain- 
ing our  rights,  he  was  disposed  to  bow  submissively  to  his  Britannic  Majes- 


MM 


[431] 


30 


ty,  and  then  ofTcr  a  million  acres  of  our  western  land  as  the  price  of  his 
humiliation.  This  very  proposition  shows  that  the  Executive  was  satisfied 
tiiat  our  claim  to  the  disputed  territory  was  just,  and  could  not  be  yielded 
to  Great  Britain  without  violating-  the  constitution.  But  to  avoid  this  dif- 
ficulty, to  be  enabled  to  cede  to  Great  Britain  without  an  equivalent  a  lar^c 
district  of  country,  he  assures  Maine  that,  if  she  will  surrender  her  juris- 
diction, she  shall  be  well  paid  from  the  national  treasury  or  the  public  do- 
main. 

Resolve  this  proposition  into  its  elements,  and  what  is  it?  Why,  an  act 
is  to  be  done  which  is  allowed  to  be  unconstitutional,  but  to  remove  this 
difficulty  a  bargain  is  to  be  made  with  the  State  of  Maine,  and  the  United 
States  is  to  foot  the  bill !  The  President  is  willing  to  give  to  Great  Britain 
more  than  two  millions  of  acres  of  eastern  land,  and  then  one  million  of 
western  land  is  to  be  offered  on  the  altar  of  our  own  degradation  !  Is  this 
the  purpose  for  which  our  rich  public  domain  is  held  ?  Is  it  put  within 
the  power  of  the  National  Government  that  they  might  buy  our  peace  with 
transatlantic  monarchs  ? 

But  let  us  look  at  this  subject  with  reference  to  ourselves.  The  State  of 
Massachusetts  owns  one  moiety  of  the  territory  in  question.  But  Maine 
is  asked  to  give  it  up  to  the  President,  that  he  may  yield  it  to  the  unjust 
claim  of  a  foreign  power  !  Should  this  take  place,  how  is  Massachusetts 
to  be  remunerated  for  the  loss  she  sustains  7  Is  any  provision  to  be  made 
for  her  ?  None  whatever.  We  think  this  branch  of  the  subject  the  more 
important,  because  the  present  Executive  of  the  Union,  pledged  to  "  follow 
in  the  footsteps  of  his  illustrious  predecessor,"  has  renewed  this  proposition, 
or  something  of  this  character,  to  the  State  of  Maine,  as  we  learn  by^a 
message  of  Governor  Kent,  submitted  to  the  Leojisiature  of  Maine  on  tHo 
14th  of  the  present  month.  This  proposition  is  for  a  "conventional  line" 
of  boundary  ;  and  upon  it  his  excellency  remarks,  «  The  question  now  is, 
as  I  understand  it,  whether  we  shall  take  the  lead  in  abandoning  the  treaty, 
and  volunteer  propositions  for  a  conventional  line." 

Will  the  people  of  Massachusetts  give  their  assent  to  propositions  of  this 
kind?  Are  they  willing  to  compromit  the  honor  of  the  nation,  and  to  put 
their  own  rights  in  jeopardy,  only  to  enable  the  President  to  comply  with 
the  demand  of  Great  Britain,  a  demand  which,  as  it  appears  to  us,  has  no 
foundation  in  justice  ?  We  think  not.  We  believe  that  both  the  interest 
and  the  honor  ..f  Massachusetts  call  upon  her  to  adhere  to  the  boundary, 
as  it  is  described  in  the  treaty  of  1783.  Your  committee  feel  constrained 
to  say,  in  the  language  of  the  late  message  of  the  Governor  of  Maine 
"with  a  most  anxious  desire  to  acquiesce  in  any  feasible  scheme  of  adjust- 
ment, or  any  reasonable  proposition  for  a  settlement,  1  feel  constrained  to 
say  that  I  see  little  to  hope,  and  much  to  fear,  from  the  proposed  departure 
from  the  treaty  line." 

It  is  true  that  the  Executive,  in  the  correspondence  with  the  British, 
Government,  keeps  up  the  appearance  of  insisting  upon  the  line  described' 
in  the  treaty ;  but  the  concessions  we  have  spoken  of  entirely  neutralize 
all  appearances  of  insisting  upon  the  terms  of  the  treaty  of  1783,  and 
emboldened  the  British  Government  to  say,  in  1834,  "  that  to  carry  the 
treaty  strictly  and  literally  into  execution  is  physically  and  geographically 
impossible." 

But  after  these  concessions  of  the  President ;  after  pressing  upon  Great 
Britain  the  proposition  to  seek  for  the  highlands  west  of  the  St.  Croix 


meridian,  i 
the  Preside 
of  1831  an 
accordance 
requested 
boundary 
presented 
we  have  a 
of  the  St. 
Was  it  nol 
that  treaty 
portion  of 
award  of 
question, 
a  portion 
the  Britisl 
that  "  a  lii 
the  westw 
the  treaty 
It  is  wi 
see,  or  thi 
reignty  o 
Nothing  \ 
present  E 
Decembei 
which  ex 
northeasts 
United  St 
tive,  for  a 
should  su 
possessior 
full  confi( 
terminate 
the  time 
We  do 
disputed 
Lower  C 
this  terri 
these  sut 
consideri 
solemnly 
faction  tl 
dary.     \ 
terous,  a 
concile  t 
friendly 
and  ma^ 
withhoU 
granted 
Nor  ' 
and  dec 
feel  that 


price  of  his 
was  satisfied 
)t  be  yielded 
void  this  dif- 
'aleiita  lame 
cr  her  jiiris- 
pubiic  do- 


31 


[431] 


,c 


Why,  an  act 

remove  this 
the  United 
reat  Britain 
!  million  of 

on !  Is  this 
put  within 

ir  peace  with 

The  State  of 
But  Maine 
the  unjust 
assachusctts 
to  be  made 
Get  the  more 
i  to  «  follow 
proposition, 
learn  by  a 
laine  on  tKo 
fitional  line" 
ition  now  is, 
g  the  treaty, 

tions  of  this 
,  and  to  put 
omply  with 
)  us,  has  no 
the  interest 
!  boundary, 
constrained 
of  Maine 
3  of  adjust- 
istrained  to 
I  departure 

he  British, 
5  described' 

neutralize 
1783,  and 

carry  the 
raphically 

pon  Great 
St.  Croix 


meridian,  if  the  two  nations  could  not  agree  upon  highlands  on  that  meridian, 
the  President  gravely  tells  both  Houses  of  Congress,  in  his  annual  messages 
of  1831  and  1835,  that  he  has  presented  to  Great  Britain  a  "proposition  in 
accordance  with  the  resolution  of  the  Senate."  The  resolution  of  the  Senate 
requested  that  the  negotiation  should  be  opened  for  the  ascertainment  of  the 
boundary  "  accordins^  to  the  treaty  of  1783,"  and  the  main  proposition 
presented  and  discussed  with  the  British  Government,  was  that  to  which 
we  have  already  alluded,  viz :  to  seek  for  highlands  west  of  the  meridian 
of  the  St.  Croix.  Was  this  complying  with  the  resolution  of  the  Senate? 
Was  it  not  rather  throwing  every  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  execution  of 
that  treaty?  The  Senate  resolved  that  the  Executive  could  not  cede  any 
portion  of  the  territory  of  Maine,  and  on  this  ground  they  rejected  the 
award  of  the  arbiter ;  but  did  not  the  Executive,  by  the  proposition  in 
question,  depart  from  the  language  of  the  treaty,  and  attempt  a  cession  of 
a  portion  of  Maine?  It  seems  so  to  your  committee,  and  in  this  opinion 
the  British  Government  coincide.  They  assert,  as  we  have  already  seen, 
that  "a  line  drawn  from  the  head  of  the  St.  Croix  to  highlands  found  to 
the  westward  of  the  meridian  of  that  spot,  would  not  be  the  boundary  of 
the  treaty." 

It  is  with  extreme  mortification  that  we  contemplate  this  subject.  We 
see,  or  think  we  see,  that  not  only  the  honor  of  the  nation,  but  the  sove- 
reignty of  Maine  and  the  interest  of  Massachusetts  totally  disregarded. 
Nothing  whatever  has  been  done  to  bring  this  controversy  to  a  close.  The 
present  Executive  of  the  United  States,  in  his  message  to  Congress,  in 
December,  1837,  says:  "Of  pending  questions,  the  most  important  is  that 
which  exists  with  the  Government  of  Great  Britain,  in  respect  to  our 
northeastern  boundary.  It  is  with  unfeigned  regret  that  the  people  of  the 
United  States  must  look  back  upon  the  abortive  efforts  made  by  the  Execu- 
tive, for  a  period  of  more  than  half  a  century,  to  terminate,  what  no  nation 
should  suffer  long  to  remain  in  dispute,  the  true  line  which  divides  its 
possessions  from  those  of  other  powers.  It  is  not  to  be  disguised  that,  with 
lull  confidence,  often  expressed,  in  the  desire  of  the  British  Government  to 
terminate  it,  loe  are  apparently  as  far  from  its  adjustment  as  we  were  at 
the  time  of  signing  the  treaty  of  peace  in  1783." 

We  do  not  intend  to  go  into  the  subject  of  the  encroachments  upon  the 
disputed  territory  by  the  neighboring  provinces  of  New  Brunswick  and 
Lower  Canada,  in  the  granting  of  a  railroad  and  marching  of  troops  across 
this  territory,  nor  of  the  imprisonment  of  a  citizen  of  Maine.  We  leave 
these  subjects  to  that  injured  State,  and  we  arc  happy  to  learn  that  they  are 
considering  the  subject.  But  we  do  feel  ourselves  called  upon  to  protest 
solemnly  ai,'d  firmly  against  these  encroachments.  We  view  with  dissatis- 
faction the  delay  which  has  already  taken  place  on  the  subject  of  this  boun- 
dary. We  regard  the  claim  set  up  by  Great  Britain  as  absurd  and  prepos- 
terous, and  an  actual  infringement  of  the  treaty  of  1783 ;  and  we  cannot  re- 
concile the  course  she  pursues  on  this  subject  with  her  pretensions  of  a 
friendly  disposition  towards  this  nation.  Her  pretensions  to  honor,  justice, 
and  rnagnaiiimity,  are  and  must  be  regarded  as  equivocal,  so  long  as  she 
withholds  from  us  that  which  is  justly  our  due,  that  which  she  has  solemnly 
granted  us  by  treaty  stipulations. 

Nor  can  we  accord  to  the  Federal  Executive  the  praise  of  promptitude 
and  decision,  or  of  a  faithful  discharge  of  the  duties  intrusted  to  him.  We 
feel  that  we  have  been  injured ;  that  our  rights  have  been  disregarded  by 


1 


[431] 


m 


those  who  have  sworn  to  defend  and  protect  them.  We  have  looked  to  the 
General  Government  for  wise  and  efficient  measures  to  bring  this  protracted 
controversy  to  a  close ;  but  we  have  looked  in  vain.  That  Government 
which  has  boldly  asserted  our  rights,  and  by  active  and  energetic  measures 
has  obtained  of  France  the  long-withheld  indemnity  ;  which  has,  at  the  in- 
stance of  some  of  the  southern  States,  driven  the  defenceless  aborigines 
from  their  homes  and  the  graves  of  their  fathers ;  which  has  been  so  jealous 
of  national  honor  on  our  southwestern  frontier  as  to  hazard  our  peaceful 
relations  with  a  neighboring  republic ;  that  Government,  deaf  to  the  entreaty 
of  Massachusetts  aiid  Maine,  has,  by  acquiescence,  concessions,  and  a  mis- 
erable diplomacy,  strengthened  the  claim  of  a  foreign  power  to  six  millions 
of  our  territory,  and  has  virtually  attempted  to  transfer  our  soil  and  our 
freemen  to  the  jurisdiction  of  a  monarch.  And  while  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment has  been  thus  remiss  in  its  duty,  the  Government  of  the  neighboring 
province  of  New  Brunswick  has  exercised  almost  undisturbed  jurisdiction 
over  the  disputed  territory.  And  while  this  is  permitted  by  our  Govern- 
ment and  pursued  by  her  provinces,  Great  Britain  will  not  be  at  all  anxious 
to  terminate  this  controversy  ;  and  why  should  she  be  ?  She  has,  at  the 
present  time,  nearly  all  the  advantages  of  entire  jurisdiction ;  and  she  knows, 
full  well,  that  procrastination  will  operate  in  her  favor,  and  she  will  ulti- 
mately be  enabled  to  plead  this  possession  in  support  of  her  claim. 

The  British  Government,  in  all  recent  negotiation  upon  this  subject, 
takes  it  for  granted  that  there  are  no  highlands  on  the  meridian  of  the  head 
of  the  St.  Croix,  near  the  source  of  the  streams  that  fall  into  the  St.  Law- 
rence. But  of  this  position  there  is  not  one  particle  of  proof.  It  is  true  that 
the  British  surveyors  did  not  continue  the  line  north  to  the  dividing  ridge, 
and  that  the  surveys  made  by  our  own  agents  were  less  perfect  in  this  than 
in  some  other  parts  of  the  line ;  but  from  the  best  information  we  can  ob- 
tain, we  think  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  the  highlands,  as  claimed  by  the 
United  States,  are  2,000  feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea.  But  if  instead  of 
2,000,  they  were  200  feet,  they  would  answer  the  description  of  the  treaty, 
if  they  actually  divided  the  rivers  which  empty  themselves  into  the  St.  Law- 
rence from  those  which  flow  into  the  Atlqntic  ocean. 

But  it  is  time  that  this  British  assumption  was  put  at  rest.  The  line 
ought  to  be  run,  and  the  monuments  erected.  The  General  Government 
owes  it  to  this  Commonwealth,  and  especially  does  she  owe  it  to  the  State 
of  Maine,  to  run  and  establish  the  line  according  to  the  treaty  of  1783. 
Let  competent  surveyors  be  employed ;  let  the  entire  line  be  run,  the  eleva- 
tions taken,  and  suitable  monuments  erected.  The  Federal  Government 
is  bound  by  the  constitution  to  protect  her  citizens  in  the  enjoyment  of 
their  rights,  and  to  support  every  State  in  the  rightful  possession  of  her  ter- 
ritory. In  the  expression  of  this  sentiment,  we  are  happy  to  find  that  we 
speak  the  sentiment  of  Maine  herself. 

Nor  will  such  a  survey,  such  an  exploration  of  the  country,  interfere  in 
the  least  with  any  treaty  engagements.  Great  Britain,  as  appears  from  a 
report  of  a  committee  to  the  Maine  Legislature,  on  the  9th  of  the  present 
month,  has  taken  the  liberty,  without  authority  from  the  National  or  State 
Government,  to  march  her  troops  over  this  very  territory.  This  is  a  direct 
violation  of  the  law  of  nations  and  of  treaty  stipulations ;  but  no  such  ob- 
jection  can  be  made  to  running  a  line  to  ascertain  a  treaty  boundary  with 
the  knowledge,  and,  if  it  can  be  obtained,  with  the  consent  and  co-operation 
of  the  British  Government.    She  could  no|  consistently  refuse  her  co-ope- 


ration, m\ 
ing  hersel 
Let  the 
to  run  the 
made  to 
survey  of 
know  for 
now  takei 
our  own  ' 
raonumen 
made,  an< 
relation  t( 
Massachu 
controver 
apparentl 
treaty  of 
manly  toi 
this  perpl 
We  ca 
considers 
of  the  pea 
upon  this 
voice  on 
their  ver^ 
'  should  b( 
of  the  ua 
the  comr 
panying 


The  follow 
It  vas  n 
date.    I 

"The 
of  the  I 
of  the  I 
the  poin 
in  ascei 
source  ' 
the  nor 
betweer 
source  ( 
west  ar 
those  r 
which 
necticu 
suitable 


n 


[431  J 


ooked  to  the 
is  protracted 
Government 
ic  measures 
as,  at  the  in- 
aborigines 
en  so  jealous 
our  peaceful 
the  entreaty 
••ind  a  mis- 
six  millions 
oil  and  our 
Jral  Govern- 
neighboring 
jurisdiction 
3ur  Govern- 
t  all  anxious 
has,  at  the 
1  she  knows, 
he  will  ulti- 


subject. 


im. 
his 

I  of  the  head 
he  St.  Law- 
is  true  that 
iding  ridge, 
in  this  than 
we  can  ob- 
imed  by  the 
if  instead  of 
f  the  treaty, 
he  St.  Law- 

Thehne 
rovernment 
to  the  State 
ty  of  1783. 
>,  the  eleva- 
rovernment 
joyment  of 
I  of  her  ter- 
nd  that  we 

nterfere  in 
ars  from  a 
le  present 
al  or  State 
i  is  a  direct 
)  such  ob. 
dary  with 
-operation 
er  co-ope- 


ration, much  less  could  she  object  to  the  line  being  run,  without  subject- 
ing herself  to  the  imputation  that  she  knows  that  her  claim  is  unjust. 

Let  the  General  Government,  then,  appoint  an  agent  and  surveyors 
to  run  the  line  described  in  the  treaty  of  1783.  Let  the  proposition  be 
made  to  Great  Britain  to  unite  with  us,  and  make  a  thorough  and  accurate 
survey  of  the  whole  region.  If  she  refuses,  let  us  proceed  ex  parte,  and 
know  for  a  fact  what  are  the  elevations  throughout  the  entire  line.  It  is 
now  taken  for  granted  by  Great  Britain,  and  has  bean  half  conceded  by 
our  own  Government,  that  highlands  cannot  be  found  due  north  from  the 
monument,  which  will  answer  the  terms  of  the  treaty.  Let  surveys  be 
made,  and  this  point  put  at  rest.  The  time  has  arrived  when  the  facts  in 
relation  to  this  subject  should  be  known.  The  people  of  Maine  and  of 
Massachusetts  have  waited  with  much  solicitude  the  final  settlement  of  this 
controversy.  But  being  now  told  by  the  highest  authority,  that  "  we  are 
apparently  as  fur  from  its  adjustmenr  as  we  were  at  the  time  of  signing  the 
treaty  of  peace  in  1783,"  we  feel  cttUed  upon  lo  speak  out  in  a  firm  and 
manly  tone,  and  to  urge,  with  the  spirit  of  freemen,  the  final  adjustment  of 
this  perplexing  and  vitally  importani  subject. 

We  call  upon  the  Executive  of  the  nation  to  press  this  subject  upon  the 
consideration  of  Great  Britain  ;  we  call  upon  Congress,  the  proper  guardian 
of  the  people's  rights,  to  adopt  such  measures  as  will  lead  to  definitive  action 
upon  this  subject ;  we  call  upon  the  good  people  of  Maine  to  raise  their 
voice  on  a  question  involving  not  only  their  interest,  but  their  sovereignty, 
their  very  existence  as  a  State.  Believing  that  the  voice  of  Massachusetts 
should  be  heard  on  a  subject  thus  important, — a  subject  involving  the  honor 
of  the  nation,  and  the  interest  and  sovereignty  of  two  independent  States, 
the  connnittee  would  respectfully  recommend  the  adoption  of  the  accom- 
panying resolutions. 

CHARLES  HUDSON, 

For  the  committee. 


APPENDIX. 

The  following  document  is  an  agreement  between  the  United  Slates  and  the  State  of  Maine. 
It  was  never  ratified  by  the  respective  Governments ;  and  comes  before  us  without  title  or 
date.    It  was  entered  into  in  the  summer  of  1832, 

"  The  King  of  the  Netherlands,  mutually  selected  as  arbiter  by  the  King 
of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  and  the  President 
of  the  UJuted  States,  and  invited  to  investigate  and  make  a  decision  upon 
the  points  of  difference  which  had  arisen  under  the  treaty  of  Ghent  of  1814, 
in  ascertaining  that  point  of  the  highlands  lying  due  north  from  the 
source  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  designated  by  the  treaty  of  peace  of  1783  as 
the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia,  and  in  surveying  the  boundary  line 
between  the  dominions  of  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  from  the 
source  of  the  river  St.  Croix  directly  north  to  the  above  mentioned  north- 
west angle  of  Nova  Scotia ;  thence  along  the  said  highlands,  which  divide 
those  rivers  tht^t  empty  themselves  into  the  river  St.  Lawrence  f  na  those 
which  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean,  to  the  northv/esternmost  he  ^  of  Con- 
necticut river,  having  officially  communicated  his  opinion  that  it  will  be 
suitable  to  adopt,  for  boundary  between  the  two  Slates,  (qu'il  conviendra 
3 


[431] 


34 


d' adopter  pour  limitc  des  Etats,)  a  line  drawn  dne  north  from  tl.j  source 
of  the  river  St.  Croix  to  the  point  where  it  intersects  the  middle  of  the 


thalweg  of  the  river  St.  John  , 


thence  the  middle  of  the  thalweg  of  that 


river,  ascending,  to  the  point  where  the  river  St.  Francis  empties  itself 
into  the  river  St.  John  ;  thence  the  middle  of  the  thalweg  of  the  river  St. 
Francis,  ascending,  to  the  source  of  its  sou  t  western  most  branch,  desig- 
nated on  map  A  by  the  letter  X ;  thence  a  line  drawn  due  west  to  the 
highlands ;  thence  along  the  said  highlands,  which  divide  those  rivers 
that  empty  themselves  into  the  river  St.  Lawrence  from  those  that  fall  into 
the  Atlantic  ocean,  to  the  northwesternmost  head  of  Connecticut  river: 
And  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Maine  having  protested,  and  continu- 
ing to  protest,  against  the  adoption  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
of  the  Hne  of  boundary  thus  described  by  the  King  of  the  Netherlands, 
as  a  dismemberment  of  her  territory,  and  a  violation  of  her  constitutional 
rights  :  And  the  President  of  the  United  ^tates  having  appointed  the  un- 
dersigned Secretaries  of  the -departments  ot  State,  of  the  Treasury,  and  of 
the  Navy,  to  meet  with  such  persons  as  might  be  appointed  by  the  State 
of  Maine,  for  the  purpose  of  entering  into  a  provisional  agreement  as  to  the 
quantity  and  selection  of  land  of  the  United  States,  wliich  the  State  of  Maine 
might  be  willing  to  take,  and  the  President  would  be  willing  to  recommend 
to  Congress  to  give,  for  a  release  on  her  part  of  all  claim  of  jurisdiction  to, 
and  of  her  interest  in,  the  land  lying  north  and  east  of  the  line  so  desig- 
nated as  a  boundary  by  the  King  of  the  Netherlands :  And  the  Governor 
of  Maine,  by  virtue  of  the  authority  vested  in  him,  having  appointed  the 
undersigned,  William  Pitt  Preble,  lluel  Williams,  and  Nicholas  Emery, 
commissioners  on  the  part  of  said  State,  to  meet  and  confer  with  the  said 
Secretaries  of  State,  ot  the  Treasury,  and  of  the  Navy,  thus  authorized  as 
aforesaid,  with  a  view  to  an  amicable  understanding  and  satisfactory  ar- 
rangement and  settlement  of  all  disputes  which  had  arisen,  or  might  arise, 
in  regird  to  the  northeastern  boundary  of  said  State  and  of  the  United 
States:  And  several  meetings  and  conferences  having  been  had  at  Wash- 
ino[ton,  between  the  eighteenth  day  of  Mav  and  the  second  day  of  June, 
1832,  and  the  said  commissioners,  on  the  part  of  the  State  of  Maine,  hav- 
ing distinctly  declared  that  said  State  did  not  withdraw  her  pro'  =  gainst 
the  adoption  of  the  line  designated  as  a  boundary  by  the  Kinj*  of  the 
Netherlitnds,  but  would  continue  to  protest  against  the  same ;  and  that  it 
was  the  desire  of  the  Legislature  and  Government  of  Maine  that  new  ne- 
gotiations should  be  opened,  for  the  purpose  of  having  the  line  designated 
by  the  treaty  of  peace  of  1783  run  and  marked  according  to  that  treaty  ; 
and,  if  that  should  be  found  impracticable,  for  the  establishment  of  such  a 
new  boundary  between  the  dominions  of  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain  as  should  be  mutually  convenient :  Maine,  in  such  case,  to  be  in- 
demnified, so  far  as  practicable,  for  jurisdiction  and  territory  lost  in  con- 
sequence of  any  such  new  boundary,  by  jurisdictional  and  other  rights 
to  be  acquired  by  the  United  States  over  adjacent  territory,  and  transferred 
to  said  State :  And  for  these  purposes,  the  undersigned  commissioners  were 
ready  to  enter  into  a  provisional  agreement,  to  release  to  the  United  States 
the  right  and  claim  of  Maine  to  jurisdiction  over  the  territory  lying  north 
and  east  of  the  line  designated  by  the  arbiter,  and  her  interest  in  the  same, 
the  said  State  of  Maine  and  the  State  of  Massachusetts  being  owners  of 
the  land  in  equal  shares ;  suggesting  at  the  same  time  the  propriety  of 
suspending  the  conferences  until  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  whose 


advice  it  h 
his  lucssag 
act  in  the  i 
sury,  and 
did,  on  tli( 
foUowing : 
Resolve^ 
tion  with  I 
boundary 
Britain  or 
treaty  of  \ 
Whereii 
did  renew 
State  of  J\ 
to  open  a 
poses  men 
mcnts  relf 
of  other 
interested 
diction  an 
iier  herct( 
Secretarif 
pose,  that 
state  of  tl 
rccommei 
the  releaf 
interest  i 
Netherla 
to  be  sek 
as  may  I 
the  Terr 
United  S 
regulatic 
out  dedi 
ceived. 
Britain, 
by  lier 
would 
the  afore 
new  ter 
shall  be 
annexec 
dnction 
tempts  ( 
case,  an 
full  con 
of  the 
of  the 
tlio  sai( 
tlie  nn 
of  the 
declara 


35 


[431] 


'J  source 
Idle  of  the 
|e^  of  that 
•ties  itself 
river  St. 
ich,  desig- 
est  to  the 
ose  rivers 
t  fall  into 
iciit  river: 
Id  continu- 
ited  States 
therlands, 
stitutional 
id  the  un- 
y,  and  of 
the  State 
It  as  to  the 
e  of  Maine 
Bcommend 
idiction  to, 
:  so  desig- 
Governor 
lointed  the 
IS  Emery, 
h  the  said 
horized  as 
factory  ar- 
liglit  arise, 
he  United 
at  Wash- 
f  of  June, 
[aine,  hav- 
'  =     gainst 
i»g  of  the 
md  that  it 
tt  new  ne- 
lesignated 
at  treaty  ; 
of  such  a 
nd  Great 
to  be  in- 
it  in  con- 
ler  rights 
ansferred 
lers  were 
ed  States 
"g  north 
the  same, 
wners  of 
priety  of 
Js,  whose 


advice  it  had  become  the  duty  of  the  President  to  take,  and  before  whom 
his  message  for  that  purpose  was  then  mider  consideration,  should  finally 
act  in  the  matter,  in  wliich  suggostioii  the  Secretaries  of  State,  of  the  Trea- 
sury, and  of  tlie  Navy,  concurred.  And  the  Senate  of  the  United  States 
did,  on  the  twenty-tliird  day  of  June,  1832,  pass  a  resolution  in  the  words 
following : 

Resolved^  That  the  Senate  advise  the  President  to  open  a  new  negotia- 
tion with  his  Britannic  Majesty's  Government,  for  the  ascertainment  of  the 
boundary  between  the  possessions  of  the  United  States  and  those  of  Great 
Britain  on  the  northeast  frontier  of  the  United  States,  according  to  the 
treaty  of  peace,  of  1783. 

Whereupon,  the  Secretaries  of  State,  of  the  Treasury,  and  of  the  Navy, 
did  renew  their  communications  with  the  commissioners  on  the  part  of  the 
State  of  Maine,  and  state  it  to  be  the  wish  and  intention  of  the  President 
to  open  a  negotiation  with  tlie  Government  of  Great  Britain  for  the  pur- 
poses mentioned  by  the  said  commissioners,  and  also  for  making  arrange- 
ments relative  to  the  navigation  of  the  river  St.  John,  and  the  adjustment 
of  other  points  that  may  be  necessary  for  the  convenience  of  the  parties 
interested  ;  but  deeming  a  cession  from  the  State  of  Maine  of  all  her  juris- 
diction and  right  of  soil  over  tlie  territory  heretofore  described,  and  in  the  man- 
ner heretofore  stated,  as  indispensable  to  the  success  of  such  negotiation,  the 
Secretariesof  State,  of  the  Treasury,  and  of  the  Navy,  did  declare  and  pro- 
pose, that,  in  consideration  of  such  cession,  the  President  will,  as  soon  as  the 
state  of  the  negotiation  with  Great  Britain  may  render  it  proper  to  do  so, 
recommend  to  Congress  to  grant  to  the  State  of  Maine  an  indemnity  for 
the  release,  on  her  part,  of  all  right  and  claim  to  jurisdiction  over,  and  her 
interest  in,  the  territory  beyond  the  line  so  designated  by  the  King  of  the 
Netherlands.  The  said  indemnity  to  consist  of  one  million  acres  of  land, 
to  be  selected  by  the  State  of  Maine,  and  located  in  a  square  form,  as  near 
as  may  be,  out  of  the  unappropriated  lands  of  the  Utiited  States,  within 
the  Territory  of  Michigan  ;  the  said  lands  to  be  surveyed  and  sold  by  the 
United  States,  at  their  expense,  in  the  same  manner  and  under  the  same 
regulations  which  apply  to  the  public  lands ;  and  the  whole  proceeds,  with- 
out deduction,  to  be  paid  over  to  the  State  of  Maine  as  they  shall  be  re- 
ceived. But  if,  in  the  result  of  any  negotiation,  as  aforesaid,  with  Great 
Britain,  the  State  of  Maine  shall  ultimately  lose  less  of  the  territory  claimed 
by  her  north  and  oast  of  the  rivers  St.  John  and  St.  Francis  than  she 
would  according  to  the  line  designated  by  the  King  of  the  Netherlands, 
the  aforesaid  indemnity  shall  be  proportionate  to  the  actual  loss ;  and  if  any 
new  territory,  contiguous  to  the  State  of  Maine,  not  now  within  her  limits, 
shall  be  acquired  by  such  negotiation  from  Great  Britain,  the  same  shall  be 
annexed  to,  and  be  made  a  part  of,  said  State ;  and  a  farther  proportionate  de- 
duction shall  be  made  from  the  indemnity  above  mentioned.  But  if  such  at- 
tempts on  the  part  of  the  President  to  negotiate  should  wholly  fail,  and  in  that 
case,  and  not  otherwise,  the  proper  authority  of  the  United  States  should,  on 
full  consideration,  determine  to  acquiesce  in  the  line  designated  by  the  King 
of  the  Netherlands,  and  to  establish  the  same  as  the  northeast  boundary 
of  the  United  States,  the  State  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  the  proceeds  of 
the  said  million  of  acres,  without  any  abatement  or  deduction — which  offer 
t!io  undersigned  commissioners  provisional! v  accede  to,  and  on  condition 
of  the  due  performance  of  all  and  singular  the  things  which  by  the 
declarations  of  the  Secretaries  of  State,  of  the  Treasury,  and  of  the  Navy, 


[  431  ] 


86 


and  by  the  proposal  aforementioned,  are  to  be  performed  or  intended  to  be 
performed,  they  agree  to  recommend  to  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
Maine  to  accept  said  indemnity,  and  to  release  and  assign  to  the  United 
States  all  right  and  claim  to  jurisdiction,  and  all  her  interest  in  the  territory 
north  and  east  of  the  line  designated  by  the  King  of  the  Netherlands.  But 
it  is  distinctly  understood,  that  until  this  agreement  shall  have  been  accepted 
and  ratified  by  the  Legislature  of  Maine,  nothing  herein  shall,  in  any  wise, 
be  construed  as  derogating  from  the  claim  and  pretensions  of  the  said 
State  to  the  whole  extent  of  her  territory,  as  asserted  by  her  Legislature. 
Nor  shall  anything  herein  contained  be  construed  so  as  to  express  or  imply, 
on  the  part  of  the  President,  any  opinion  whatever  on  the  question  of  the 
validity  of  the  decision  of  the  King  of  the  Netherlands,  or  of  the  obligation 
or  expediency  of  carrying  the  same  into  effect. 

EDWARD  LIVINGSTON, 
LOUIS  M'LANE, 
LEVI  WOODBURY, 
WM.  P.  PREBLE, 
RUEL  WILLIAMS, 
NICHOLAS  EMERY." 


Resolvci 
copy  of  tlu 
United  Sti 
and  Reprei 
means  to  I 


COMMONWEALTH  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 


IN  THE  YEAR  ONE  THOUSAND  EIGHT  HUNDRED  AND  THIRTY-EIGHT. 

Resolves  concerning  the  northeastern  boundary. 

Resolved,  That  the  claim  of  Great  Britain  to  all  the  territory  in  the 
State  of  Maine,  lyin^  north  of  Mars  Hill  and  the  tributary  waters  of  the 
Penobscot,  is  totally  inconsistent  with  the  treaty  of  peace  of  seventeen  hun- 
dred and  eighty-three,  and  will,  if  persisted  in,  inevitably  tend  to  disturb 
the  friendly  relations  now  subsisting  between  that  Government  and  the 
Government  of  the  United  States. 

Resolved,  That  no  power  delegated  by  the  constitution  to  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  authorizes  them  to  cede  to  a  foreign  nation  any 
territory  lying  within  the  limits  of  either  of  the  States  in  the  Union. 

Resolved,  That  the  proposition  made  by  the  late  Executive  of  the  United 
States  to  the  British  Government,  to  seek  for  "  the  highlands"  west  of  the 
meridian  of  the  source  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  is  a  departure  from  the 
express  language  of  the  treaty  of  peace,  an  infringement  of  the  rights  of 
Massachusetts  and  Maine,  and,  as  its  consummation  involves  a  cession  of 
State  territory,  is  in  derogation  of  the  constitution  of  the  United  States. 

Resolved,  That  the  proposition  recently  made  by  the  present  national 
Executive  to  the  Government  of  Maine  to  substitute  a  "  conventional  line" 
for  the  line  described  iri  the  treaty,  is  calculated  to  strengthen  the  claim  of 
Great  Britain,  impair  the  honor  of  the  United  States,  and  put  in  jeopardy 
the  interest  of  Massachusetts  and  Maine. 

Resolved,  That  Congress  be  requested  to  cause  the  njirtheastern  section 
of  Maine  to  be  speedily  explored,  and  the  boundary  line,  described  in  the 
treaty,  to  be  established.  ,         >, 


nded  to  be 
B  State  of 
[he  United 
le  territory 
[[ids.  But 
n  accepted 
I  any  wise, 
)f  the  said 
legislature. 
5  or  imply, 
ion  of  the 
obligation 

JSTON, 


,¥." 


EIGHT. 


Dry  in  the 
ters  of  the 
nteen  hun- 
to  disturb 
t  and  the 

e  Govern- 
lation  any 
ion. 

the  United 
rest  of  the 
i  from  the 
e  rights  of 
cession  of 
States, 
it  national 
ional  line" 
e  claim  of 
1  jeopardy 

jrn  section 
)ed  in  the 


37  [431] 

«.„W,  That  his  exceH^^^^^^^^^^ 


■■■;  ' 


mim 


mw* 


